Christ alone exalted in Dr. Crisp's sermons partly confirmed in answering Mr. Daniel Williams's preface to his Gospel truth stated, by alledging testimonies from Scripture and the doctrine of the Church of England, in the Book of homilies establish'd by law and other orthodox authorities : shewing how he hath wronged as well the truth as the said doctor in the great point of justification by the Neonomian doctrine / humbly offer'd by S.C., an unworthy son of the said doctor, author of a book entituled, Christ made sin, reflected on by Mr. Williams.

Chriſt alone Exalted IN Dr Criſp's Sermons, Partly Confirmed in Anſwer to Mr. Williams Preface to his Goſpel Truth ſtated and Vindicated, by Comparing ſome of his unfair Accuſations of the ſaid Doctor, with the Scripture, and the Doctrine of the Goſpel, Eſtabliſhed by Law in the Homilies, &c.

WHEN Peter who ſeemed to be a Pillar was come to Antioch, I withſtood him to the Face, becauſe he was to be blamed, ſaith the Apoſtle, Gal. 2.9, 10. And if an Apoſtle who ſeemed a Pillar, might Err in Ceremonies, and be blamed; ſo may our ſeeming Pillars ſome of them Err in Subſtance, conjoyning our Goſpel Holineſs with Chriſts Righteouſneſs, and be blamed. Now I perceiving what I ſuppoſe will appear a great Error in the Preface of Mr. Williams to his Arraignment of Goſpel Truths in Dr. Criſp's Sermons, and ſuppoſing none will mind the Preface, that deſign to Anſwer the Book, but paſs it over as a Curſory Diſcourſe: I think it not ungrateful to ſtudious Chriſtians to animadvert on the brief Syſtems of Religion, which Mr. Williams hath there given the World, in oppoſition not ſo much to Dr. Criſp as to the plain expreſs Scripture, and the ſound ſenſe thereof, held out by the great Orthodox Divines that were Staunch againſt A • minianiſm upon our firſt coming out of Popery, when Zeal for Chriſt alone in Salvation was warm. Wherein I beſeech the Lord ſo to guide my Thoughts and Pen that I may mind only his Glory in and through our Lord Jeſus. The Meek he will guide in Judgment, which meekneſs I beg of the Lord; though a Golden Calf of Mans Goſpel Holineſs to be ſet up in the place of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, would provoke a Moſes. Yet I hope to retain as well Meekneſs as Integrity till I die. It is beyond all doubt, Man, ſince the Devil deceived him (that upon eating he ſhould be as God,) doth think with himſelf, he can (tho' dead) do ſomething which is proper only to God; that is, he can quicken his own dead Soul; he can Convert himſelf, he can be a God to himſelf; hereupon there is a great Outcry againſt any that aſſert, That our Lord Jeſus Chriſt is all in all in the Salvation of poor Sinners; and Dr. Criſps Sermons, becauſe fuller than ordinary of the free Grace of God in Jeſus Chriſt, are ſingled out to be battered, and with them the Goſpel of our Salvation is run down into terms utterly Forreign to the Scripture, and becauſe the Doctor adheres and ſticks cloſe to the Scripture terms, of our being dead, dead, dead in ſins, and our ſins, our very ſins, Chriſt bare in his Body on the Tree, as the Apoſtles Peter and Paul expreſly ſay, he is exclaimed againſt: And that this great Champion might appear compleatly armed in oppoſing Dr. Criſp, he puts on the great ſhield of being ſolicited to this Work by ſeveral worthy Miniſters, and that this may appear true, he hath emblazoned his honour in this great Atchievement, by the Hands of ſeveral indeed worthy Miniſters, who are moſt of them in my Experience eminent Servants of our Lord Jeſus; however their Zeal for Goſpel Holineſs, may have been impoſed upon to countenance Mr. Williams making Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to be our Goſpel Holineſs: Though I have a great honour for all thoſe of them whom I know, yet I ſuppoſe they will not think themſelves diſhonoured to ſay, I think moſt of them were impoſed upon in getting their ſubſcribing to what they never throughly examined I am ſure one of them tho' next the firſt, yet nulli ſecundus for a ſweet Chriſtian Spirit among them ſaid a few Weeks before Dr, Criſps Sermons were reprinted, to an Eminent Mininiſter in a great Company, If Dr. Criſp be an Antinomian, ſo am I, and I am ſure he ſaid in a Sermon December 12. 1669. We are firſt made active by Chriſt, in order to his bringing us to God, and September 24. 7. 1672. Chriſt hath brought the Law to its end, it hath no more to require be is the aboliſhing end the Law is quite out of doors, as to juſtify, plant a Crab-Tree in the beſt Soil, it brings forth crabs till planted in Chriſt, ſo that there muſt be Ʋnion to Chriſt, by Gods planting us in Christ before any good Fruit. So this Gentleman, and ſo Doctor Criſp in his Faith, the Fruit of Union, contrary to Mr. Williams; and yet this excellent perſon is by Mr. Williams Art, taught to ſay with the reſt. We judge our Reverend Brother hath in all that is material, fully and rightly ſtated the Truths and Errors mentioned as ſuch, and do account he hath in this work, done conſiderable Service to the Church of Chriſt; and ſo will I ſay, when by it he hath ingaged Able Pens to vindicate the truth from Sophiſtical Gloſſes; that he hath done conſiderable ſervice againſt his will. I reckon this Preface is the marrow of his Book, and I ſhall begin with as great a point as any I know of in the Bible, next to the Deity of the Lord Jeſus, and yet 'tis that which is the chief Fruit of his Deity, which is his Righteouſneſs as God-Man made ours by Faith; by Mr. Williams his treating this, he diſcovers his whole Soul concerning Juſtification that great Article, ſtantis vel cadentis Eccleſi •• , of the ſtanding and falling of that Church that holds it, as Luther ſaid, in that a little Leven here leveneth the whole lump. Here Mr. Williams hath made very bold with the expreſſion of the Apoſtle Paul, in Phil. 3.9. That I may be found in him not having mine own righteouſneſs which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Chriſt, the righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith; here Mr. Williams, inſtead of extolling this righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and the rich Grace of God to impute this to us, he runs Counter to the ſtream of the Goſpel, and daſhes to pieces all the comfort that thouſands have found in this Scripture, as ſignifying Chriſts Righteouſneſs, our cloathing before God, and gives his Romiſh gloſs upon it in theſe words: I exclude not this Righteouſneſs (Chriſts imputed) when I affirm that the Righteouſneſs of God Phil. 3.9. Principally intends the Goſpel Holineſs of a Perſon Justifyed by Chriſts Righteouſneſs, which in plain Words is this, When I Daniel Williams ſay in the preceding words, his Righteouſneſs imputed is the cauſe for which we are juſtifyed and ſaved, when we do anſwer the Goſpel Rule; now I explain the anſwering the Goſpel Rule, and how we make this Righteouſneſs of Chriſt the cauſe for which we are ſaved, that is, I do affirm or poſitively declare without any ſuſpicion of being accounted a ſelf Juſticiary, that the righteouſneſs of God, which the Apoſtle accounted all his Righteouſneſs but dung for, and which he ſaith is the righteouſneſs through the Faith of Chriſt, and the righteouſneſs of God by Faith: This I aſſume; for the honour of Mans Righteouſneſs to concur with Chriſts imputed Righteouſneſs; that this Expreſſion of the Apoſtle intends, yea, it principally intends the Goſpel Holineſs of a perſon Juſtified by Chriſts righteouſneſs, that is to ſay, though the Apoſtle expreſly ſaith, 'tis not my own Righteouſneſs, yet I will make the Apoſtle mean 'tis my own Holineſs, tho' the Apoſtle calls it the righteouſneſs through the Faith of Chriſt. I affirm 'tis the Holineſs of the perſon juſtified, and though I do not exclude Chriſts Righteouſneſs, (in Words) yet I affirm 'tis Goſpel Holineſs that the Apoſtle intends. If this be not a plain contradicting the Apoſtle, and making the Apoſtle contradict himſelf, then nothing can do ſo: The Apoſtle ſaith, T'is not mine own Righteouſneſs; 'tis (ſaith Mr. Williams) my Goſpel Holineſs; this is to ſay and unſay, it is not, and yet it is: I pray what great difference between my Righteouſneſs and my Goſpel Holineſs, the Apoſtle would not for a World be ſound in his Righteouſneſs of any ſort but in Chriſt, and yet Mr. Williams ſaith, the Apoſtle would be found in his Goſpel Holineſs. I believe Mr. W. conſulted few Proteſtant Divines in that affirmation, for here he goes diametrically oppoſite to the current ſtream of them of which hereafter, and againſt the very direct words of the Apoſtle, in which he laboured to bring forth his meaning; the Holy Spirit by the Apoſtle uſes much pains and skill to free the truth from Mr. W. his interpretation of a ſinners or Saints being found in his own righteouſneſs or holineſs, by varying the expreſſions, thereby explaining the truth of our righteouſneſs, not having any thing to do in our Juſtification, or ſtanding at Gods bar either in our Conſciences, or at the great day, but Mr. Williams with a bold ſtroke of his Pen, flatly oppoſes it, the Apoſtle ſaith, that the righteouſneſs he would be found in, is that which is through the Faith of Chriſt: How can this be Mr. Williams his Goſpel Holineſs?By Faith, Noah being warned, &c. became Heir of the righteouſneſs which is by Faith; which ſhews us, that Noah had in thoſe dealings of God with him, the very ſame righteouſneſs for the Object of his Faith, which our Goſpel now propoſeth to us, and which our Faith lays hold upon. Which the ſame Apoſtle ſtiles the Righteouſneſs of God, and the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, which is by Faith, Phil. 3.9. Which Righteouſneſs for Justification he more ſetly treateth of, in Rom. 3.21. But now the Righteouſneſs of God without the Law is manifeſted, even the Righteouſneſs of God, which is by Faith of Jeſus Chriſt: He witneſſed of that Righteouſneſs which is by Faith, as it hath Chriſt for its Object; this all ſound Proteſtants do profeſs. Goodwin of Elect. fol. 40. The Faith of Jeſus is Faith in the righteouſneſs of Chriſt, who is the Lord our Righteouſneſs; and the Apoſtle, leſt he ſhould not be fully underſtood, he explains what this (through the Faith of Chriſt) is, he ſaith plainly, 'tis the righteouſneſs of God; and leſt we ſhould miſtake here, and turn this righteouſneſs of God, this righteouſneſs through the Faith of Chriſt, which is the righteouſneſs of God, to our Goſpel Holineſs with the Arminians or with Grotius, and Mr Williams; he explains it farther, and ſaith, 'tis the righteouſneſs of God by Faith, as much as to ſay, 'tis that Righteouſneſs which Chriſt as God, wrought out for us, who is made of God to us righteouſneſs, and which is made ours by Faith. But though theſe 4 Bars be laid in the way: 1. Not my own righteouſneſs.

2. But that through the Faith of Chriſt.

3. Plainly (not Goſpel Holineſs) but the righteouſneſs of God.

4. And this Righteouſneſs of God ours by Faith; yet this Gentleman takes a Run and leaps over them all, with a confidence moſt bold, daſhes out all the Apoſtles ſenſe, and ſaith, I affirm it principally intends Goſpel Holineſs, than which nothing can be a more ſhameleſs impoſing on the plain Word of God (I conceive) and a corrupting of it, which he doth by his confident affirmation; that the righteouſneſs of God, ours by Faith, is a perſons own Goſpel Holineſs, he may as well affirm that being juſtified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jeſus, is, being juſtified by our Goſpel Holineſs.

The Goſpel of Salvation by Jeſus, would ſtand on tickliſh terms, and ſoon be loſt, if a few more ſuch bold Attempts as this againſt the righteouſneſs of God, ours by Faith, be allowed, but the Gates of Hell ſhall never be able to overthrow this Truth, that the righteouſneſs of God there is Chriſts righteouſneſs believed on to Juſtification, and not our Goſpel Holineſs. We muſt not loſe ſuch a glorious Star out of the Firmament of the Scriptures; nay, I may ſay 'tis the Sun, for take this Mr. Williams, and take all the Bible away; for I would as ſoon hope to be Juſtifyed by the Turkiſh Alkoran as by my Goſpel Holineſs, nay, it muſt not come in for a ſhare, or have any concurrence as to cauſality, for a little Leven, in this caſe will leven the whole Lump.

O the Cloud of Witneſſes that have from this Text of Phil. 3.9. made many comfortable Concluſions that this righteouſneſs of God, by Faith, is the imputed righteouſneſs of Chriſt received by Faith.

O the famous Dr. Tuckny, how would he have ſhamed that Man that ſhould have enervated this Text on which he preacht many Sermons, lately Printed contrary to Mr. Williams Expoſition.

O the rich ſtreams of Goſpel Grace, that flowed from ſolid Dr. Jacomb. at Tunbridge in June 1686. In ſix Sermons on this Text, which I took from his Lips, all contrary to this puddle of Goſpel Holineſs. Hundreds of theſe I paſs, and ſhall cite a few Paſſages out of older times, as the Faith of our Proteſtant Forefathers, not to be raviſht from us by Mr. Williams, tho' he had a hundred Vouchers for his ſerving the Church.

Firſt, our Compoſers of the Homilies in King Edward the Sixth's time, which is the Doctrine of the Church of England, Confirmed by many Acts of Parliament; they quote Bazil a Greek Father, in fol. 16. of the Homily of Salvation on this very Text, Phil. 3.9. This is (ſaith Bazil) a perfect rejoycing in God when a Man advanceth not himſelf for his own righteouſneſs, but acknowledgeth himſelf to lack true Juſtice and Righteouſneſs, and to be Juſtified by the only Faith in Christ; and Paul doth glory in the contempt of his own righteouſneſs, and he looketh for the righteouſneſs of God by Faith, Phil. 3.

Here is not a word of our Goſpel Holineſs brought in, but a total contempt of his own righteouſneſs; call it what you will, the righteouſneſs of the Law or Goſpel holineſs, if it be his own, 'tis contemned; and ſomewhat plainer, is Mr. Perkins on the ſame Text in fol. 659. Vol. 1. who ſaith thus; The Apostle Paul in deſiring to be found not in his own righteouſneſs, but in Chriſts, deſired nothing elſe but that he might be accepted of God for Chriſts ſake, and be eſteemed righteous in his righteouſneſs; and this very Obedience which is in Chriſt, and not in us, is the very matter of the Juſtice of the Goſpel, and this is made ours by Faith; the Goſpel requires not the conditions of Merit or of any work to be done on our parts, in the Caſe of Juſtification. Toletus writing on the Rom. 10.3. the not ſubmitting to the righteouſneſs of God, which is the ſame righteouſneſs of God by Faith, as is in Phil. 3.9. he hath this expreſſion upon it, and ſaith it is— Justitiam partam morte Christi quam Deus Credenti imputat & donat; and Pareus, ſaith 'tis Juſtitiam Christi, and Vatablus on Rom. 10.4. concerning Chriſts being the end of the Law for righteouſneſs, ſaith, Ʋt qui credit in Deum reputetur Justus à Deo. perinde ac ſi totam legem impleverit, finis legis per ſe est ut ex ejus prestatione Juſtificentur homines, hunc finem lex obtinuit in ſolo Chriſto, qui legi penitus ſatisfecit & per Christum in nobis quoque obtinet quibus data ei legi ſatisfactio per fidem imputatur, thus Va • ablus: Gomarus gives in his Teſtimony very plainly againſt Goſpel holineſs, being the righteouſneſs of God, and ſaith on Rom. 1. on the righteouſneſs of God, revealed from faith to faith, in this Queſtion, Quid ſit juſtitia? non qua Deus Juſtus eſt ſed effectivè quod à Deo data eſt: & Eſtius; Quâ nos revera in oculis ejus Justos facit: & Tirinus; Quâ nos Deus à Peccatis abſolvit: And Zanchy on the Righteouſneſs of God without the Law, Rom. 3.21. ſaith, Quomodo fides Juſtificat, aſſert fides juſtitiam non effectivé quaſi habitualiter Justos efficiat, nec materialiter quaſi ipſa ſit illud quo juſti cenſemur, ſed objectivè, quatenus in Chriſtum, qui eſt Juſtitia noſtra dirigitur, & organicè, quatenus Justitiam Christi nobis imputatam (fides) apprehendit. And on this very Text, Phil. 3.9. but the righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith, Id est, Justitia quae eſt ex Deo quae tota penitus & omnibus ſuis partibus merum eſt Donum Dei gratuitum, venit haec Justitia è Caelo unde cadit Super fidem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 non dicit hic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quaſi fides prout opus eſt nostrum, vel ſit pars hujus Juſtitia, vel illud promereatur, ſed tantum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Thus theſe Worthies on this Text agree with Dr. Goodwin who ſaith p 40. of Election, which righteouſneſs by Faith to be Chriſts Righteouſneſs, all ſound Proteſtants profeſs, wherein they are as far from ſaying the righteouſneſs of God, by faith, is our Goſpel holineſs, as that it is our Goſpel unholineſs. I ſuppoſe it might eaſily be ſhewn whence Mr. Williams had this unſound Interpretation of this glorious Text, even from Grotius, as he from the Mother of Harlots, Rome, who Joyns mans works with Chriſts for Juſtification. But methinks every true Lover of the Lord Jeſus, and honourer of him with his Righteouſneſs made ours, ſhould riſe in Arms againſt ſuch an Expoſition of this Text, and ſay, Sir, I would rather the Pen though Steel, ſhould be thruſt into the Ball of my right Eye, than thus to pierce again the ſide of the Lord Jeſus, and let his righteouſneſs run waſte, while 'tis joyned ſo corruptly with our Holineſs. But what need the ſuffrage of theſe Worthies be called in to oppoſe this expoſition, they may as well be called in to ſay White is not Black, and black not white, for 'tis poſitively againſt the expreſs word of God, and ſuch an Interpretation is to make the Word a Noſe of ſoft Wax, to turn it which way one will; the Spirit of God ſaith expreſly, 'tis the righteouſneſs of God by Faith, that is, 'tis the righteouſneſs of him who is God bleſſed for ever, and 'tis ours by Faith. No, ſaith this bold Pen, 'tis our Goſpel Holineſs, that is, 'tis our conformity to all the Rules of the Goſpel. From ſuch Divinity the Lord Deliver us.

By this preface it may be gueſſed how he will attack the free Grace of God, ſet forth in the Goſpel, and held up to the light by Dr. C. ex pede Herculem, ex ungue Leonem.

This is the firſt part of the proof of his oppoſing Dr. C. in order to bring in our righteouſneſs to concur with Chriſts in our Juſtification, by his perverting the Text in calling the righteouſneſs of God by Faith our Goſpel Holineſs which is near a kin to the Quakers Light within, being their Chriſt; ſo if our Goſpel Holineſs be the righteouſneſs of God, then 'tis our Chriſt, for Chriſt is called by Thomas his God, and by the Apoſtle Paul, he is made of God our Righteouſneſs, and by Mr. Williams this Chriſt our righteouſneſs, is our Goſpel Holineſs.

So that by this Clew or Thread at the entrance into his Book, we are led into the Myſtery of his laying ſo great Blame on Dr. C. for renouncing all our Righteouſneſs in the matter of Juſtification before God. But to trace him from the beginning, he enters on the Stage with ſo much heat againſt Errors of his own forming, that he forgets himſelf, and the firſt daſh in his Preface is a trip of nonſenſe, making his beginning to ſound as if it were his ending, ſaying, the Revival of thoſe Errors, whereas he had named no Errors before; but Zeal and his Paſſion puts and begins on theſe Errors, which hath no reference, and inſtead of ſaying the Errors which I have proved againſt Dr. C. he ſaith, the revival of theſe Errors: Well, what will the revival of theſe Errors (in the air) do? they muſt not only exclude that Miniſtry as Legal, which is moſt apt in its Nature, and by Christs Ordination, to convert Souls, but alſo renders Ʋnity amongſt Christians a thing impoſſible: But what if they be found ſound Goſpel Truths, what you take for Errors, then the Miniſtry excluded as Legal, will be found not very apt in its nature to Convert Souls, and not of Chriſts Ordination ſo to do: Whether they be Errors or no, will be ſeen when Examined; in the mean time, this expreſſion looks like Legal and Ungoſpel, to ſay the Miniſtry he pretends to hath an aptneſs in its own nature to convert Souls; and is Forreign to the Apoſtle's account, he gives of converting Souls, for the Goſpel it ſelf preacht by the Apoſtles themſelves, had no aptneſs in its Nature to convert Souls, nay, it was ſo far from that in its own nature, that it became a ſavour of Death to the non Elect; the Apoſtle did not Preach a deal of trumpery qualifications muſt be found in Men to prepare them to true Converſion, but he preacht Chriſt Crucified, to the Jews a ſtumbling Block, and to the Greeks Fooliſhneſs, but to them which are called both Jews and Greeks, Chriſt the Power of God, 1 Cor. 1.25. and in 2 Cor. 2.16. the Apoſtle ſaith, We are of God a ſweet ſavour of Chriſt, in them that are ſaved, and in them that Periſh, to the one, the ſavour of Death to Death. Where is the aptneſs of the Goſpel in its own nature to convert Souls, when you find it is the occaſion of ſtumbling, and is a Savour of death, where there doth not go forth the ſame Almighty Power with it, as raiſed up Chriſt, and now though the Apoſtles preaching was far from having any thing in its own nature, of aptneſs to convert Souls, yet a human Invented way of Preaching the Goſpel with threats and promiſes, you ſay is apt, nay 'tis moſt apt in its Nature to convert Souls; what doth this tend to but the taking off the effectual Irreſiſtible Grace of God in calling ſome by the ſame word which hardens others; I fear the converſion that is wrought by the natural aptneſs of a certain Miniſtry, is only a Converſion to a natural Religion, not to that which is from above. Well, you ſay your Miniſtry is not only apt in its nature, but by Chriſts Ordination to convert Souls: If it be by Chriſts Ordination, it muſt have a tendency to what Chriſt hath ordained it for, but the Miniſtry of Chriſts Ordination is not to ſet up any thing in Man to convert him, unleſs deadneſs in a Man is a Qualification to make him live; he ſaith the Dead ſhall hear the Voice of the Son of God and live, and you who were dead in ſins, hath he quickned; you may tell a dead Man of many Qualifications that be neceſſary to make him live, but 'tis all in vain, till Chriſt by his Omnipotent Power ſay the word, and with the word ſpeaks life: But this aptneſs of a Miniſtry in its nature, and then hooking in Chriſts Ordination of it without any Proof, ſhews we muſt take things for granted, becauſe you ſay it, though the Scripture ſay juſt the contrary, in ſaying, When thou waſt in thy blood, I ſaid to thee, live, Ezek. 16. What Threats and Promiſes were here, what aptneſs in denouncing the Terrors of the Law, when even the Promiſes of the Goſpel have not a natural aptneſs till Chriſt ſpeaks the word, and ſay, Lazarus come forth.

The other ſide ignorantly ſet up the Name of Chriſt and Free Grace. (he ſays) 'Twould be good Manners firſt to prove 'tis done ignorantly, and next it would help your cauſe to prove that the Name of Chriſt, and free Grace, are not of more value in the Caſe than your Promiſes and Threats. O have a care of a fling at the Name of Chriſt, for by Faith in his Name, the Apoſtle made the Cripple to go.

This is ſet up againſt the Government of Chriſt and the rule of Judgment, D. W. No, 'tis ſet up by the Authority of the Apoſtle, who deſired to know nothing among the Corinthians but Chriſt and him Crucifyed, not a rag of Mens Righteouſneſs to cover the leaſt ſpeck, would the Apoſtle know. As for the Government of Chriſt, he needs none of your ſtating.

I believe many Abettors of theſe mistakes are honestly Zealous for the honour of Free Grace, M. W. Again, he comes with his theſe miſtakes before he names any, ſo poſitive in his Nonſenſe through Zeal of Oppoſition is he, they are honeſtly zealous: But if they be in the right, as will appear if the Word of God be right, then 'tis to be feared the Oppoſer will not be honeſtly a Dictator, and to calumniate before he prove, is no ſign of over much modeſty, nor diſcretion. If he had ſaid, I ſuppoſe the Reader will find Dr. C. guilty of miſtakes by the following Diſcourſe, he might have acquitted himſelf of modeſty. But preſently theſe Errors and theſe Miſtakes without a tittle of Proof requires a reproof; he taught his venerable Vouchers, Dr. B. &c. modeſtly to ſay, he hath rightly ſtated the Truths and Errors mentioned, not theſe Errors, and theſe miſtakes; they may be rightly ſtated, and yet come far ſhort of being ſufficiently proved; and whereas they modeſtly ſay, they account he hath in this work done conſiderable ſervice to the Church of Christ. I am of their mind too, by many conſiderable Pens being engaged in anſwering it, and will ſay what an excellent Chriſtian told me, I bleſs God with all my heart every day I riſe for the opppoſing Dr. C's. Doctrine at Pinners Hall, for it hath occaſioned the light to break forth more gloriouſly thereby: in illuſtrating and confirming what was oppoſed. I ſuppoſe they refer'd to the Reverend Mr. Coles Diſcourſes.

They have not light ſufficient to ſee how God hath provided for this (honour of Free Grace) in his Rectoral distribution of benefits by a Goſpel Rule, Mr. W. If he had ſaid they have not confidence ſufficient to preſcribe God a Rule as ſome others have; I had agreed; but for light: Let us to the Law and Teſtimony, when we come to the point; but this Rectoral Diſtribution is the buſineſs, Men have coyned an Office for God, they preſcribe him a model of Government; he muſt diſtribute Benefits by a Goſpel Rule, but this Goſpel Rule is of their own Scheme, whereas the Apoſtle ſaid to the Jaylor reeking in his ſin, going about to kill himſelf, Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved; this Rectoral Diſtribution muſt have been by threats and Promiſes, you Jailor, what have you to do with the Free Grace of God in Chriſt, ſure you have heard of Dr. C. Doctrine, that Chriſt ſaves the worſt Sinner that comes to him by believing; no, hold a while, the Apoſtle Paul runs too faſt, he hath made abundance of ſuch Antinomians as Dr. C. ſtay a little, conſider, have you gracious Qualifications? Have you wept and mourned, and given full proof of your Humiliation, Godly Sorrow, Repentance, and the like? Don't tell us theſe are the Fruits of Faith, and follow Faith, but when you have found theſe, then come to us for Comfort; ſhew us your Goſpel Holineſs, and then we can tell you, Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and you ſhall be ſaved.

Many of our Ableſt Pens were engaged againſt theſe Errors, as Mr. Gataker, &c. The Provincial Synod at London. As for Able Pens, God gives various Light, and if Paul and Barnabas contended, much likelyer for Mr. Gataker and Dr. C. but 'tis eaſier refuting a dead Man than a living one, for one cannot anſwer what the other oppoſes: Peter and Paul contended, but Free Grace Paul was too hard for Legal Peter, who complyed too far, Gal, 2.11. and ſo at laſt will Dr. Criſp's Doctrine be to thoſe, that as it were bring in ſomewhat with Chriſts righteouſneſs for Juſtification. As for the provincial Synod that oppoſed by Name Doctor Criſp, I fear much of their Spirit is in thoſe that pretend to moderation, while they oppoſe this Doctrine, they were for bloody Bonners Argument againſt Dr. C. Fire and Faggot it would have come to. I remember I went when a Boy to Priſon, to ſee an Eminent Chriſtian whom that Synod had ſecured there for promoting the Publiſhing Doctor Criſp his Works; a rare way of Rectoral Diſtribution of Benefits by a Goſpel Rule, and were Power in the hands of thoſe ſeveral worthy Miniſters that Doctor Williams ſaith, oft ſolicited him to engage in this Work, I queſtion not but they would at length prevail with him, as well to impriſon Doctor Criſp his Defenders, as to aver thoſe things to be Errors, that he hath not proved ſo.

We are engaged in a new Oppoſition, to the grief of ſuch as perceive the tendency of theſe Principles. Here's new Nonſenſe in the great Champion for Man's Righteouſneſs to fit him for Chriſt's; heres a theſe without naming any; well, and what are we engaged in? Truly 'tis to grieve ſuch as conſider theſe things. To the grief of ſuch as perceive the tendency of theſe Principles, we are ingaged in a new Oppoſition (he ſaith) and I am of his mind, he or they that aſſiſted him, did ingage therein to the grief of ſuch as ſaw the tendency of the Principles he oppoſed.

But to take his meaning if it can be hit, 'tis thus, to their grief we are by them engaged in a new oppoſition; but will it not be more to their grief to find your Oppoſition is to the Truth, which by your oppoſing will be more radiant.

I believe many abettors of theſe Notions, have grace to preſerve their minds and Practices from their Influence, D. W. Here's great Conceſſion, firſt theſe Errors, then theſe miſtakes, and now, theſe Notions, at laſt I hope it will be theſe pure ſtreams of Goſpel Grace; I perceive your Eyes begin to dazle by long poring on the Truth, the Lord grant a clear ſight; you believe the Abettors have Grace? O bleſſed be God that gives to the moſt unworthy.

But they ought to conſider that the generality of Mankind have no ſuch Antidote, D. W. That is, the generality of Mankind have not Grace to preſerve them from the influence of Errors and miſtakes: I doubt ſo too, but methinks this word, the generality of Mankind not having ſuch an Antidote, ſavours as if the generality of Mankind had ſome Antidote, or, as the Arminian ſays, all have ſtill ſufficient by nature if they would improve it to preſerve them: O how apt are we to refer ſomewhat of good to the generality of mankind, whereas in truth not only the generality have not Antidotes to keep them, but the contrary is moſt true, no man whatſoever unconverted hath any Antidote to keep himſelf from the Poyſon of any Error ever broached.

I muſt encounter another Plunder, I ſee, and pick out the meaning. Who can wonder at the general abatement of Humble walking, when ſo many affirm, I ſins are not to be feared, D. W. I have heard of fearing God by every Chriſtian, and Chriſt ſaith, I'll tell you whom you ſhall fear, but I never heard of fearing ſins, or a complaine that ſins are not feared. The Pagans do fear the Black Devil they ſay, leſt he ſhould do them hurt, but never any Chriſtian I think had any ſuch reverence in him toward ſin, probably he means, many affirm they ought not to be afraid to commit ſin, if he mean ſo, he was unhappy in his expreſſing himſelf, and he would do well to cite ſome of his many that ſay ſo; as for Dr. Criſp I ſuppoſe he will not offer at it, though his words look very uncharitable that way, which the Dr. flatly denies fol. 510. and ſaith, Let me not be miſtaken: I do not ſay we muſt not be afraid to ſin, but they need not be afraid of their ſins. But as to his meaning that no Believer ought to fear any hurt can be done him by his ſin, as Dr. Criſp his aſſertion, when he quotes any thing of Dr. Criſps tending that way. I will prepare for an Anſwer, in the mean time. I ſuppoſe he will not deny, but God often turns that which ſeems moſt dreadful to be moſt beneficial, as the Small Pox to Cure a Conſumption, ſo ſin the worſt of Evils, to the advancing God's glory and beſt of goods; but he wont ſay Dr. Criſp taught that, therefore we ought to ſin that Grace may abound, an old objection of Satan anſwered by the Apoſtle; and Dr. Criſp in his Sermon 8. Chriſtian Liberty no Licentious Doctrine.

God hath no more to lay to the Charge of the wickedeſt Man if he be Elected, than he hath to lay to the Charge of a Saint in glory, M. Williams in his Charge. This harſh Expreſſion when compared with the Scriptures, quoted by Dr. Criſp, will be better reconciled to our Spirits, than that Chriſt the Holy Jeſus in his moſt perfect ſtate of moſt perfect holineſs, as God the Father is Holy, was made ſin and a Curſe, and yet God bleſſed for ever, is it more aſtoniſhing, that a Sinner in his blood, in his higheſt Sins, as Manaſſeh, ſhould be lookt upon in Chriſt as choſen in him loved in him from all Eternity to all Eternity, and look'd on by God in Chriſts righteouſneſs, ſhould have nothing to be laid to his Charge; is this more harſh, than for Chriſt in his moſt compleat holineſs to be lookt on by God to be a Curſe for us? Dr. Criſp will be found not to have ſpoken of ſinners as in themſelves; but as lookt on in Chriſt, and then the time of being in blood, was a time of Love. And a little Charity in D. Williams might have lead, not to make a ſcare-crow of ſuch an Expreſſion, but if the Apoſtles Oppoſers fetch'd wrong concluſions from his Bleſſed premiſes of Free Grace, ſo it will be to the end of the World by ſelf Juſtitiaries, but of this in its more proper place. Again,

The Elect are not governed by fear or hope, M. W. charge. No, why ſhould they be governed by any but their Lord Jeſus, who is both their fear and hope. For the Laws of Christ have no promiſes nor threats to rule them by, W. This is a moſt falſe Charge, for Dr. Criſp owns they are under the Law to Chriſt, and inforces it, and ſaith expreſly in fol. 561. Do not miſtake me, I have no thoughts as if Wrath and Vengeance were not to be preached, and made known even to Believers, yea Beloved, wrath and Vengeance is to be made known to them, and that as the Deſerts of ſin, and as the means to keep Men from ſin. Now doth it not look like Malice for any to aſſert ſo groſs an untruth, as to ſay, ſo 'tis affirmed by thoſe he oppoſes, meaning D. Criſp. That they are not under impreſſions of rewards or puniſhments as motives to Duty, or preſervatives againſt ſin, W. Can any thing be a clearer Proof of falſehood if not malice than this? And it may be at leaſt 100 ſuch Expreſſions as this, to deſiſt from ſin by motives of Rewards, and ſometimes of Puniſhment. But report, and we will report, and I muſt own 'tis marvellous to me, that ſo many worthy Divines ſhould take upon truſt Mr. Williams Aſſertions out of Dr. Criſp, and not compare them with the Book, eſpecially ſuch a liberal charge as his, that Believers are not under impreſſions as aforementioned, and then in his next Paragraph to ſay, to the beſt of my knowledge, I have in nothing miſrepreſented Dr. Criſps Opinions. Whereas to the beſt of my Knowledge, he hath not only forged Opinions on him as this laſt; but hath aſſerted plain falſities againſt him, for which I will go but to his firſt charge in his Book in Fol. 1. where he ſaith as the Error of Dr. Criſp. that Dr. Criſp ſaith, The Elect are at no time of their lives under the Wrath of God, nor are they ſubject to condemnation, if they ſhould dye before they believe, whereas there is not one word in the Quotation of Doctor C. that he ſaith, they are not ſubject to Condemnation, if the die before they believe. So that that is forged by Mr. Williams, as the firſt grand Error, and all the reſt will ſeem like it. Now if he be falſe in his firſt Charge compared with his Quotation; any unbyaſt perſon will believe he is much more ſo in the following Charges, but thus it pleaſes God to ſuffer prejudice to blind him, that any inquirer into his Book, may Judge of his Veracity by the firſt daſh of his Pen, and ſo ſeeing that unſincere, may reject the whole, as not worth looking into, but of this more in its place.

Next let us ſee how he dreſſes up a Scheam for Doctor Criſp, wherein if he be not very wary, he muſt expect to be tript, for 'twill be found dangerous for Mr. Williams to repreſent him but in his own words; this then I take to be his Charge in general, for he ſaith, Dr. Criſp his Scheme is this, (but I ſay 'tis Mr. Ws. for him) That by Gods meer Electing Decree, all ſaving bleſſings are by Divine Obligation made ours, and nothing more is needful to our title to theſe Bleſſings, that on the Croſs all the ſins of the Elect were transferred to Christ, and ceaſed ever after to be theirs, that at the first moment of Conception, a Title to all thoſe decreed Bleſſings is perſonally applyed to the Elect, and they inveſted actually therein; hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of theſe Bleſſings, nor ought they to intend the leaſt good to themſelves, in what they do, ſin can do them no harm, becauſe it is none of theirs, nor can God afflict them for any ſin; and all the reſt of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the Dethroning of Chriſt, enervating his Laws, and pleadings, obſtructing the great Deſigns of Redemption, oppoſing the very ſcope of the Goſpel, and the Ministry of Chriſt and his Prophets and Apoſtles. Here's the Charge, gratis Dictum, and the Conſequences of it: It can't be immagined the Rancour that Prejudice will make; the Preaching up of Chriſt, and Free-Grace through him, is the Dethroning Chriſt; what could Malice ſay worſe? Is crying up the King for our Deliverer, from Popery and Tyranny, a dethroning him? Juſt ſo is crying up our Salvation only by Chriſt, without a concurrence of our Works, a dethroning him; in conſidering this Scheme, ſo far I take it for granted that Mr. Williams looks on it in the whole and every part of it to be falſe Doctrine, by the contrary to which we may draw a Scheme of Mr. Williams. Thus, that by Gods Decree, no Bleſſing belongs to us, and that on the Croſs all the ſins of the Elect were not transferred to Chriſt, that at Conception a Title to Bleſſings is not applyed. But as it is not fair to urge upon him any thing that he doth not plainly aſſert, ſo I wave fixing this on him, and only touch on what may be true and what not in this Scheme.

Firſt, 'Tis not true that Doctor Criſp ſaith, that by Gods meer Electing Decree, all ſaving Bleſſings are ours by Divine Obligation, and a bare denyal is ſufficient, where he brings no Proof, and I ground it upon that word meer, for Dr. Criſp no where ſevers the Election of the Father from the Redemption of the Son, either in Covenant or actual Performance, For God bleſſeth with all Spiritual Bleſſings in Heavenly places, according as he hath choſen us in him; and this is more proof for what Mr. Williams advances as an Error, than he hath brought or can bring to make it an Error, to ſay by God's Decree, all Bleſſings are ours, ſo that this is a frivolous and falſe Charge; 'tis frivolous, becauſe the ſum of the Charge is a Truth, and 'tis falſe, becauſe Dr. Criſp never aſſerted 'tis by meer Election; but I fear, Mr. Williams to avoid running too high in the glorifying God for abſolute Electing all his fore-Ordained ones in Chriſt to Salvation, and all that occurs to it: He I fear leaves Election as a thing to depend much on our own wills, whether it ſhall take place or no, not but that our Wills muſt be brought over by Gods making us a willing People, but ſtill the Election obtains, and God Elected to the means as well as the end, and will accompliſh both.

The next Charge is that Doctor Criſp in the Scheme made for him, holds that, Nothing more is needful to our Title to theſe Bleſſings, but God's meer Electing Decree; If he means nothing needful as to Evidence of the Title, then he wrongs the Dr. who in many places makes Faith the grand Evidence under the Holy Spirit, and a Holy Converſation neceſſary, but if he means by nothing more needful to our Title but Gods Decree, taking in the redemption by Chriſt, which Dr. Criſp never ſevers, then I hope Mr. Williams is of the ſame mind, or he ſets up ſomething with Chriſt, and I would fain know why an Eſtate in Heaven ſetled in the Counſel of peace from all Eternity, between the Father, Son and Spirit, on the Children that ſhould be begotten in time by God, and be born of God, John 1.13. ſhould not be a ſufficient Title of an indeſeizable Inheritance to all the Elect as an Eſtate in Land ſetled upon Marriage, ſhould be ſufficient for the Heir 'tis ſetled upon, without that Heirs doing any thing in order to make it ſure more than when he comes to Age to enter upon it.

The next is, That on the Croſs all the ſins of the Elect were transferred to Chriſt. If this be the grand Error, then the Prophet Eſay muſt be called to account for it, with the Apoſtle Peter, The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, who in his own Body bare our ſins on the Tree. 'Tis admirable ſtrange the bold front of humane reaſoning to oppoſe the moſt plain expreſs Scriptures in the Bible; the ſins of the Apoſtle and thoſe he wrote to were committed ſeveral years after Chriſt was crucifyed, and yet he ſaith Chriſt bare them on the Tree, If Men will fight againſt plain Scripture, and cry, 'tis dethroning Chriſt to urge the truth thereof, then farewell the Goſpel. But to expoſtulate a little, either our ſins were laid on Chriſt then or never, for Chriſt ſuffers no more, and if they be laid on him now, or when a ſinner is converted, then Chriſt muſt come down again, and ſuffer, or ſin could not be expiated, but ſure 'tis ſomewhat elſe Mr. Williams means, as that ſin was never laid on Chriſt, but that when Chriſt died, he ſuffered for this end, that if we live a good life, repent and believe the Goſpel, we ſhall be ſaved; but grant that (which can never be granted, for no man can do one good Act, without true ſaving Faith in Chriſt, a ſacrifice for his ſins,) what becomes of our ſins, if Chriſt did not bear them on the Tree, they muſt lye ſome where, for they cannot be laid on Chriſt now, then they muſt lye on the Sinner, which would have ſent him to Hell preſently, but he purged away ſin by the Sacrifice of himſelf, which he could not do, if they were not on him when he was on the Croſs, when he became that Sacrifice God forbid that Mr. Williams by his Goſpel Truth ſtated, ſhould call us to a new Goſpel, as he would by making it an Error, to ſay, that the ſins of the Elect were on Chriſt upon the Croſs.

His next is of ſmaller moment, but to be taken notice of, viz. 'Tis one part of his Scheme of Dr. Criſps Errors, that he holds, that at the firſt moment of Conception, a Title to all thoſe decreed Bleſſings, is perſonally applyed to the Elect, and they inveſted actually therein. Sure this is no horrid Blaſphemy, ſince God ſaith of Jacob and Eſau before they had done good or Evil, being yet unborn, Jacob have I loved, and Eſau have I hated, and Jeremy being ſanctifyed in the Womb, Jer. 1.5. It muſt be before he had done much good, ſure an Heir of Glory is as ſoon an Heir to it as an Heir of a Kingdom; and if a young King ſhould be married but one Night and die the next Morning; if that Kingdom was purely Hereditary, the States of that Kingdom would not ſuffer the Widdow Queen to Marry again, 'till they ſee whether ſhe proved with Child or no, and if ſhe prove with Child, and that Child be born, I would fain know when that Child began to be an heir, it muſt be at the firſt moment of his Conception, or not at all. But ſome Men will hardly allow God the Prerogative, to give Titles to his Heirs as they will allow a Man to do, by a ſettlement on Marriage; they will grant that a King may go to Jail, and chooſe out the worſt Offender there, and ſave him, but God may not without Faith foreſeen chooſe Veſſels of Glory to himſelf, and make them Heirs as ſoon as they have a Being.

Hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an interest in thoſe Bleſſings. Mr. Williams. This Aſſertion is both right and wrong, as it may be taken, for if by having nothing to do in order to an intereſt, if Mr. Williams means that Dr. Criſp aſſerts the Elect have nothing to do in order to original right and Intereſt by Election of the Father, before the World, then he is in the wrong, when he charges Dr. C. with an Error in holding with the Apoſtle, that there was Grace given in Chriſt Jeſus before the World began, 2 Tim. 1.9. For in that reſpect the Elect have no more to do in order to an Intereſt in thoſe Bleſſings, than an Heir to an Eſtate ſetled on him before he was born, hath to do to gain him an Intereſt therein, and accordingly the Apoſtle is plain in Epheſ. 1.3. He hath bleſſed us with all Spiritual Bleſſings, according as he choſe us in him before the foundation of the World, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , even as he choſe us in Chriſt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and according to his own grace given to us before the World began; if he bleſſed with all bleſſings, even as he chooſe us, and if he gave his own grace to us before the times of Ages, ſure then thoſe ſo choſen, and ſo endowed with grace before time have nothing to do to get an original right or intereſt in thoſe Bleſſings, that were then given to, them and afterwards beſtowed by God upon them, no more than the Law coming 430 years after the Promiſe to Abraham had to do to obtain or evacuate the Promiſe.

But if Mr. Williams means that Dr. Criſp holds, That the Elect have nothing to do in order to the applying their Intereſt in theſe Bleſſings, then he is in the right, and Dr. Criſp wrong, when Mr. Williams proves it on the Dr. But he doth the Dr. wrong in ſo charging him, for there are whole Sermons of the Doctors to the contrary, and particularly the 17th. of Vol. 2. Of the aſſurance of Faith in P. 486 wherein he ſaith from Acts 13.39. You ſhall ſee there how neceſſarily it muſt be received, that Faith gives Intereſt in the priviledges of Chriſt. Theſe are the very words in flat contradiction to what Mr. Williams Charges him with, when he ſaith, Dr. Criſp holds the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Intereſt in thoſe Bleſſings, where this paſſage of the Dr. may convince Mr. Williams of a falſe Accuſation and Slander, contrary to the ninth Command, Thou ſhalt not bear falſe witneſs againſt thy Neighbour, But ſaith the Wiſe man, who can ſtand before Envy. I hope thoſe eminent Divines that favoured his Book, will deſire their Names may not ſtand to his Preface, leſt they be brought in to ſavour this falſe Charge; Dr. Criſp goes on upon that Text, Acts 13, 39. By this man is Preached to you forgivineſs of ſins, and whoſoever believeth on him, he is juſtifyed from all things from which he could not be Juſtifyed by the Law of Moſes; from which text the Doctor treating not of original right, or intereſt in the Bleſſings, but of the Application or Evidence hereof, he ſaith farther in fol. 486. thus; out of this Text I argue thus, If there be Juſtification where there is Believing, this believing is a proof of Justification. If therefore thou dost believe this is a certain Truth, thou art Juſtified it is an undeniable Argument, becauſe that the Apoſtle doth affix Juſtification to believing. Here by the way, beſides this aſſertion being a proof that Mr. Williams hath done amiſs in ſaying the Doctors Scheme is that the Elect have nothing to do &c. which his ſaying juſtification is affixt to believing confutes; this ſaying alſo reflects on another very falſe and groſs charge in the very firſt page of his Book, where he ſaith, Dr. Criſp holds the Elect are not ſubject to Condemnation if they dye before they believe, which as it is impoſſible they ſhould, ſo the Doctor never aſſerted they could, and this ſaying of his that Faith gives Intereſt in the Priviledges of Christ, and Juſtification is affixt to believing, ſhews that it was againſt the Doctors Sentiments, to hold that Elect perſons could die before they believe, or that he ever ſaid, If they ſhould ſo die, there was no Condemnation. But for once, I would ſuppoſe the purpoſe of God concerning the Elect, to be Created in Chriſt Jeſus, to good Works, ſhould be fruſtrate, and the Elect never ſhould come to actual Faith, and ſo never come to do a truly good Work. Now I would ask any ſober found Proteſtant, if he ſhould allow ſuch an impoſibility for Argument ſake, as that God's purpoſe in this laſt caſe could be fruſtrate, which of theſe two Aſſertions he would take for the more falſe, either, that an Elect Perſon choſen in Chriſt from all Eternity, and given to Chriſt, and grace given him in Chriſt, and accordingly dyed for by Chriſt (according to the Compact and Council of peace, and this Elect perſon dying in unbelief) is ſaved, that ſo the grand contrivance of God, and the precious blood of the Son of God, be not fruſtrate: Or this Aſſertion, that ſuch an Elect perſon dying in unbelief is damn'd, becauſe the word of Truth muſt be fulfilled, That he that believes not is condemned; far be it from any Chriſtian to affirm either, but of the two falſe poſitions, I ſhould be apt to think the firſt is not the worſt, becauſe of the Eternal deſign of the Father and Son, to ſave all the Elect given in Election to Chriſt.

The next Charge, Nor ought they to intend the leaſt good to themſelves in what they do. This is high, General and Univerſal, like the Confidence of a Man, with his drawn Sword againſt a Thiſtle; here I could have you, and there I could have you, though this be not of the Eſſence of Faith, the not intending good to our ſelves in what we do, and he would make the Doctor preach marvellous ſelf-denyal herein, as not intending the leaſt good in our doing, yet here lies a ſnare, for doubtleſs, if he means this to be an Error, then it may be he means that the Doctor holds that the Elect muſt do what they do, not with intent to procure the good of Gods reconciliation to them. If that be the Doctors Error, it is alſo of all Proteſtants, that are Orthodox, if he means that the Error is that the Doctor holds the Elect are not to do with intent to get the good of Pleaſing, honouring and glorifying God, he mightily wrongs the Doctor, witneſs his Sermons on Titus 2.11, 12 Grace teaches to deny Ungodlineſs. What good he means, no man can reach without his unfolding, but the charge muſt be high and general, though thereby Mr. Williams lays himſelf too open for a Friend to take the Advantage he might, and thereby might give him the unmannerly word of ſpeaking untruth againſt the Doctor, I will not ſay a Lye; will Mr. Williams ſay the Doctor holds the Elect ought not to intend the leaſt good to themſelves, in what they do; what will he ſay then to thoſe expreſſions of the Doctors in fol. 141. Our Righteouſneſs ſerves as a real way to manifeſt our thankfulneſs to God. Secondly, There is this uſefulneſs in our righteouſneſs, namely that we may ſerve our Generation. That Men may be drawn on to glorifie God, and we muſt ſhine before men in a Godly Converſation. Thirdly, Our Righteouſneſs is uſeful as it is the Ordinance of God, wherein be will make good thoſe things which before he hath promiſed. Now how can Mr. Williams ſay, the Dr. holds this don't intend the leaſt good, when the Dr. •• ith here, that by their righteouſneſs they walk in Gods Ordinance wherein he will make good his Promiſes; is not Eying the making good of Promiſes, or intending ſome good, but unleſs we intend the good of our Righteouſneſs or Goſpel-Holineſs to be meant by Gods Righteouſneſs, ours by Faith, as Mr. Williams aſſerts the Apoſtle intended on Phil. 3.9. Our doing is by him accounted the not intending the leaſt good to our ſelves; what can't we intend good to our ſelves, in Faſting, Praying, Relieving the Neceſſitous, walking in all Godlineſs and Honeſty, unleſs this muſt come in with Chriſts imputed Righteouſneſs for our Juſtification?

Next the Doctor holds, ſaith Mr. Williams Sin can do them no harm, becauſe it is not theirs. If he mean that ſin cannot hinder them from Heaven at laſt, then he rather wrongs himſelf by holding it can, than the Dr. for holding it cannot, for God hath caſt them all into the depth of the Sea, and ſaith, I will remember them no more; if ſo, they cannot do much hurt. If Mr. Williams, means that the Doctor holds there is no Evil in ſin to an Elect Perſon; then he is a falſe Accuſer again, for the Dr. acknowledges evil in ſin, when he ſaith fol. 4 • 0. If you would come to ſee the Evil of ſin, and to ſee it that it may be a Bridle to reſtrain you from ſin; now in this ſenſe the Dr. owns hurt in ſin, and preſcribes a way ſo to ſee it, as to be kept from it, and that is, in the next words, look upon Chriſt, if you would ſee the evil in ſin; if he mean by ſin can do them no harm, in his accuſing the Doctor, that the Dr. holds that ſin cannot do them the harm of making their Services ſtink in God's Noſtrils, then he falſely accuſes the Doctor alſo, who ſaith in fol. 404 ſin is agravated much in Eſaiah 1. When you make many Prayers, I will not hear, becauſe your hands are full of Blood; here are expreſſions to aggravate ſin, that it makes all our Prayers and Sacrifices loathſome in his Preſence, God hateth it in me and in thee. Now will Mr. Williams have the Confidence to ſay in general, that this is the Scheme of Doctor Criſp, that ſin can do the Elect no harm, whereas the Doctor ſaith plainly, that ſin makes all our Sacrifices and Prayers loathſome in Gods Preſence; is it no harm to have our Prayers loathed of God? Sure Mr. Williams would think this a great harm done him by ſin, if his wronging the dead by a falſe general charge, ſhould fly in his Face, and make loathſom his Prayers to the Lord, till he repent and obtain the waſhing of it from his Conſcience, by Faith in the Blood of Chriſt.

Again, if Mr. Williams mean that Doctor Criſp, in ſaying ſin could do him no harm, holds it ſo in general, that in no ſenſe it can hurt him, and that it is not a ſting and terrour to the Conſcience even of a Believer, while his Faith is unactive and under a Cloud, he wrongs him, for he ſaith in fol. 512. The Torments of Hell is the merit of the leaſt ſin in the World. I ſpeak not to Extenuate any ſin, ſuch as look upon theſe ſins as uncancelled, So long theſe ſins may work an horror and trembling in Perſons; and Mr. Williams will not ſay but this is harm to a poor Souls peace and comfort, and this Dr. Criſp holds, nay, he ſaith in fol. 513. Before Men come to ſee the light of the Goſpel of Chriſt, their ſins ſtare in their Faces, ſeeming to ſpit fire at them; and is this no harm, and this is to the Elect till they believe, ſo that this is no good charge of Mr. Williams. But if Mr. Williams mean 'tis an error of Dr. Criſp to ſay, there is no ſin the People of God commit, can poſſibly do them any hurt, if it be taken in the ſenſe the Doctor expreſſes calling it real hurt, in fol. 510. This may be matter of debate, but will doubtleſs iſſue on the Doctors ſide, or rather on the Apoſtle Paul's who ſaith, all things work together for good to them that love God. If ſo, then the Affliction that the Lord chaſtens withal for ſin, doth not argue that ſin brings a real hurt: If ſin could do real hurt to a Believer, ſuch as to take away his Title to Heaven, or cauſe him totally to fall from Grace, then Chriſt did not for ever by one Sacrifice of himſelf, ſave us and waſh us from our ſins, in his Blood, and perfect thoſe that are ſanctified, but if he did make an end of ſin, and brought in everlaſting righteouſneſs, for all that the Father gave him, then he having purged our ſins by himſelf on the Croſs, nailing them there, never to be able to riſe in Condemnation to thoſe that are in Chriſt; then this ſtingleſs Serpent, ſin, will never do real hurt to Believers, as the Doctor ſaith. But if Mr. Williams mean, that ſin doth hurt even Believers, becauſe it brings natural death, the Wages of ſin being Death to Believers, yet the ſting of that being taken out by our Lord Jeſus, that is ſo far from real hurt, that it is the Inlet to Eternal glory; and if that be hurt, the Lord grant Mr. Williams and I may be ſo hurt, or rather Bleſſed with it in our exits.

Several other ſuch hurts come by ſin, not from its own Nature, but from Gods Ordination, as that where ſin abounds, grace much more abounds (not that any ſhould think ſin the leſs dreadful and terrible) and as ſin hath reigned to death, ſo Grace reigns to eternal Life by Jeſus Chriſt our Lord, and yet ſtill ſin is to be avoided as the greateſt, horrideſt evil in the World; but notwithſtanding this, the Apoſtle encourageth poor Souls when they do fall into ſin, not to be afraid of their ſins, but to flie for Refuge to the Mercy-Seat, the hope, ſure and ſtedfaſt, ſet before them, ſaying, if any man ſin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jeſus Chriſt the Righteous, and thus I hope this grand Cavil is evaporated, and that it appears groundleſs for any to think Dr. Criſp had ſlight thoughts of ſin, when he ſaith, it cannot do a Believer any real hurt, yet he ſaith, the Torments of Hell is the merit of the leaſt ſin, and they will work an horrour and trembling till we ſee them Cancelled.

The next is, Nor can God afflict them for any ſin, ſaith Mr. Williams againſt the Doctor; This expreſſion is no where quoted, but inferred from the Doctor, and it is put here contrary to the Doctor's ſenſe, in which he ſpeaks of Affliction, and ſeems harſh; Mr. Williams might ſee that what the Dr. ſaith, is ſpoken by way of puniſhment, that all the Afflictions that God lays on his People, are in love, and not by way of puniſhment for their ſins, ſeeing their ſins were laid on the Lord Jeſus, and he bare them and all puniſhment due for them, and if thoſe that ſcruple ſaying, Chriſt bare the very ſins of the Elect, will yet allow he bare the puniſhment for them, ſure then they muſt grant that God doth not lay affliction on his People by way of puniſhment; God ſaith, indeed you only have I known, therefore will I puniſh you for your Iniquities, but this cannot be taken properly for puniſhment, unleſs Men will make God worſe than the fooliſh Servant, who made him a hard Maſter; viz. an unjuſt Oppreſſor, to puniſh ſins on his Son, and to puniſh them alſo on the ſinner; and beſides, that affliction which a man bears in this life, be it never ſo great, is ſo far from puniſhment proper for ſin, the leaſt of which deſerves, as Doctor Criſp ſaith, eternal Hell Torments, that it is not ſo much as a flea-biting compared with a ſtab at the Heart, but I take the ground why perſons will call afflictions on God's Children puniſhments for ſin, is on this double account. Firſt, they would make God an eaſie, tender-hearted Judge, that will commute Penance, and for a great Crime, as every ſin is, he will take a ſmall amends as a little temporal Affliction, and next they will be as kind to our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and reckon he bears the leſs if the ſinner bear part with him; but without any mincing, this muſt be owned that all afflictions on Gods people are in love; all I love, I rebuke and chaſten, and 'tis for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holineſs, and it is fatherly to deter from ſin. I do not mean that ſin hath no hand in many Afflictions, for as the Apoſtle ſaid of the diſorderly Corinthians, for that cauſe many were ſick and weak: But what the Dr. inſiſted on, was, that Affliction for ſin was not proper puniſhment, but pure love to their Souls, though I cannot ſee but afflictions are a Fruit or effect of ſin in many, yet I may, not from thence conclude, that thoſe Afflictions are from Wrath in the Father, or for puniſhmenr proper on the Child, but the effects of a Fatherly love, for if ye be without Chaſtiſement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye Baſtards, and not Sons, ſo that this Exception againſt the Doctor is a ſmall one, but becauſe it hath ſome ſeeming harſhneſs, to ſay God doth not afflict the Elect for ſin, therefore it muſt be hookt in to fill up the Charge, though the Charge in the Preface be varying and harſher, then it ſeems Mr. Williams could lay in his Book, for there is no ſuch word as nor can God afflict them for any ſin.

Mr. Williams having laid the Charge, in the next words he comes with a deadly thunder-clap, concluſion full of Indignation, ſaying, All the reſt of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Chriſt, which if true, then ſay I, let his memory for ever periſh, and his Poſterity be blaſted, as to this World. But if this Charge look like ſublimated malice, every candid Reader, will ſay, Mr. Williams, for charging falſely with High Treaſon, (a great admirer and advancer of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, with dethroning him) deſerves not a ſtab, no nor an outragious word from his Poſterity, or the lovers of the Doctor's memory. But the Anſwer of the Angel to the Devil, The Lord rebuke thee, Satan, is not this a Brand pluckt out of the Fire, Zech. 3.2. How can any thing but that which looks like Canker'd Venom againſt Free Grace. Charge him or his Doctrine point blank with no leſs than Dethroning Chriſt, when every Sermon tends chiefly to the Exalting Chriſt, and Chriſt alone, under the Father, in oppoſition to the grand Idol, or Chriſt of ſelf Juſtitiaries ſetting up mans righteouſneſs. If the whole ſtream and almoſt every Page of his Book, flows with mighty zeal for Chriſt, and jealouſie of Joyning any thing with Chriſt in our ſalvation, for f • ar of robbing Chriſt of any of the honour and Glory due to him. If this be dethroning Chriſt, I wiſh Mr. Williams would ſo dethrone him in every Sermon, and that all that name the dear and bleſſed name of Chriſt, would ſo dethrone him, Then we ſhould not have the righteouſneſs of Chriſt by faith called our Goſpel Holineſs: I would ask the greateſt Enemy that is to Juſtification only by the blood of Jeſus, who is the dethroner of Chriſt, Dr. Criſp, who in all his Sermons is for Chriſt alone exalted, Crying out none but Chriſt, none but Chriſt, to the raviſhing the Hearts of thouſands of lovers of Chriſt. Or Mr. Williams who ſets up a rectoral Government for the Lord, for ſaving ſinners in a ſapiential way, joyning our Goſpel Holineſs with Chriſt's imputed Righteouſneſs, nay, in plain terms, boldly affirming that the righteouſneſs of God by Faith, which the Apoſtle juſt before had called the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, Phil. 3.9. That this is a Believers Goſpel Holineſs. Mr. Williams cannot have the confidence to ſay Dr. Criſp was for dethroning the Chriſt the Son of the moſt high, the Chriſt the eternal Son of God made man But in truth he was for dethroning Mr. Williams Chriſt, of Phil. 3, 9. that is, Mans Goſpel Holineſs from getting in the Throne of the true Chriſt, the ever bleſſed Son of God, for juſtification of a ſinner, or to have any thing to do therein, he was for Goſpel holineſs in Doctrine and practice as much as any Perſon living, keeping it in its due place; a Friend of the Bridegroom, but not a Co-partner with the Bridegroom, and as eminent Mr. Christopher Fowler, ſaid twenty and twenty times (ſo in effect, ſay the Doctors Sremons) I would not for this Room full of Gold open my mouth againſt Evangelical holineſs, or true holineſs, one grain of it being more worth than all the World, but hold, it must not ſit on the Throne with Chriſt: It is a good Hand-maid to wait on the Queen, but it is not to lye in Bed with the Queen, or in effect, our Goſpel Holineſs muſt not affront the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, to take his Crown and dignity from him: Now in any impartial mind, it may eaſily be judged who is the Dethroner of Chriſt. O whether will Paſſion and Prejudice lead men, and how will it blind them, when their Conſcience cannot but tell them, that they themſelves come ſhort of him in Exalting Chriſt, they cry out againſt others that are of a far more elevated ſtrain in the honouring the Lord Jeſus. O you dethrone Chriſt, becauſe you do too much magnifie him in oppoſition to Goſpel Holineſs, coming in for any ſhare in our ſalvation.

This is his firſt link in the Chain dethroning Chriſt, as much as to ſay, I'll lay load enough, but the firſt ſtroak ſhall do his buſineſs, the Dr. Opinions have been to the dethroning Chriſt, would any one but ſuch as Solomon ſpeaks of, who caſteth about Firebrands, Arrows and Death, Prov. 26.18. have uttered ſuch language without one tittle of proof, without ſaying I have proved his Opinions Dethrone Chriſt, or I am of Opinion his Notions tend to dethrone Chriſt; none of this ſoftneſs is in his Iron ſtrain, but point blank, all his Opinions follow in a Chain, to the Dethroning Christ, his preaching that Chriſt is the only way, is dethroning Chriſt, his Preaching Man's Righteouſneſs, is the grand Idol, is dethroning Chriſt. Any one may gueſs 'tis the rubbing that Sore makes ſuch out-cry: O you dethrone Chriſt, when you unhorſe Men from their own righteouſneſs: But if for every idle word, that men ſhall ſpeak, they ſhall give an Account, can they think they ſhall not alſo for every falſe uncharitable charge they give, in accuſing a grand Aſſerter of the Alone Rights of the Lord Jeſus in the matter of our Salvation, to be in that very thing, a Dethroner of the Lord Jeſus. What ſhall be done to thee, thou falſe Tongue. Pſal. 120.3. I hope the Lord will incline ſuch Arguers not to adhere to their own Arguments, but fling down their ſtrong Reaſonings, and ſubmit to the alone righteouſneſs of God for Salvation without our Goſpel Holineſs ſharing in it, being overcome by the Almighty overpowering ſweet drawing of the Spirit, and cry before it be too late, as Julian did, Viciſti Galilae, thou haſt overcome me, O Galilean by thy Blood and Spirit, freely given to me for my righteouſneſs and Life, to aſcribe all the glory to thee, none to my Goſpel Holineſs, this is all the harm I wiſh and pray for the uncharitable cenſurer of Dr. C. for, for that he had by his Opinions dethroned Chriſt, cujus contrarium.

The next is, Enervating his Laws and Pleadings: This flows from the other, if Chriſt be dethroned his Laws muſt be enervated, But if Chriſt alone is exalted, his Holy and Pure word is eſtabliſhed, as the Dr. often aſſerts from the Apoſtle; do we make void the Law by Faith, nay we eſtabliſh it by bringing in Chriſt fulfilling the Law for us, and writing it in our Hearts, as holy juſt and good, teaching us by his Spirit, to deny all ungodlineſs, as in the Sermons on that Text. Dr. Criſp ſhews; 'tis not the exalting the Blood of Chriſt, that Enervates the Laws of God and Chriſt, but 'tis the making our Righteouſneſs which is every jot defiled to ſtand in the place of the abrogated Moral Law; to ſay that in regard we are not able to fulfill the moral Law, God accepts of our Evangelical Righteouſneſs, that is, our own Goſpel Holineſs, and ſo making it in ſome ſenſe a Co-partner with Chriſts Righteouſneſs, denying it in words, but eſtabliſhing it in deed; this is the real enervating Chriſts Laws, elſe how comes the righteouſneſs of God by Faith, Phil. 3.9. to be called Goſpel Holineſs? I am ſure the Righteouſneſs of God by Faith juſtifies a Believer, and if this Righteouſneſs of God be our Goſpel Holineſs, then our Goſpel Holineſs juſtifies a Believer, and this they will bring it to at laſt, or they ſay nothing.

Obſtructing the great Deſign of Redemption: A virulent Charge, but unleſs obſtructing man's Righteouſneſs from eclipſing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs be the Crime, nothing of this can be laid to the Drs. Charge, how inconſiſtent is this Charge with the great cry againſt him, that Chriſt ſaves the worſt of ſinners that come to him, even when in their blood and filth which he freely aſſerts, and yet preſſes not to live in ſin, but to glorifie God in all holy Converſation. If by the deſign of Redemption Mr. williams means that we are redeemed or created in Chriſt Jeſus, to good Works, and Charges the Dr. to obſtruct that deſign, what can be more contrary than that in the Doctors Sermons, when he ſaith, fol. 556. The belief of this, (that Free Grace abounds) doth certainly and effectually teach and produce an hatred of ſin, and a love of holineſs, and in fol. 557. If there be any ſuch, (as ſay, let us ſin that Grace may abound) let me deal plainly with them, for my part I muſt account them the greateſt Monſters upon the Face of the Earth; the greatest Enemies to the Church that ever were, and I ſay of ſuch dishonourers of the Church, and disturbers of the Conſciences of Gods People, that they are Carnal, Senſual, and Deviliſh; they are the greatest Enemies to the Free Grace of God, and the greateſt Subverters of the Power and Purity of the Goſpel, and the greatest hinderers of the Courſe of it under Heaven: No perſons in the World do ſo wound the ſides of Chriſt as he who doth profeſs the Goſpel, and yet live Wickedly, and if there be any ſuch here, let me tell them their Faith is no better than the Faith of Devils, for they believe and tremble, and that Chriſt will have a heavier reckoning, and account for ſuch when they come to Judgment, than for any Perſons under Heaven beſides. Now can Mr. Williams in cold blood ſay this Doctrine obſtructs the deſign of Redemption; that this oppoſes the ſcope of the Goſpel.

Next he Apoligizes for the Doctor, That he had not entertained theſe Opinions, if he had conſidered that God's Electing Decree is no legal grant, nor a formal promiſe to us. I ſuppoſe it may be gathered that the Doctor conſidered God's electing Decree as much as his Oppoſer, when the Dr. lays all the ſtreſs of Mans happineſs upon the abſoluteneſs and irreverſibleneſs of it, and if others had as great an honour for the veracity and ſtedfaſtneſs of thoſe Mountains of Braſs, they would not make mens Salvation that are elected ſo uncertain a thing as many do.

As for the Decree not being a legal grant, Mr. Williams hath erected a new term of Art, what he means I know not, but if he means 'tis a grant not good in Law, or that 'tis ſuch a grant as no man can plead at the Barr of God, either in our own Conſcience, or at the great day of Judgment, to ſay, Lord thou haſt elected me, therefore I muſt be ſaved. This I ſuppoſe I may flatly deny, and ſay (provided I know my Election, as the Apoſtle ſaith, 1 Theſ. 1.4. Knowing Brethren your Election or as Chriſt bids us rejoyce that your Names are written in the Book of Life, when this comes to be known) it may be pleaded, or elſe there would be little ground of joy in it, and it may be pleaded as a grant good in Law, for the diſcharge of every one to whom it belongs, not that the Dr. or any conſiderate Chriſtian is for Election going alone without Juſtification, and Sanctification, no not in Children in the Womb that are Elected and die there. So that though Election be not a formal promiſe, yet in this ſenſe it muſt be a legal grant, or a grant good in Law: But there may be a ſnare in Mr. Williams his electing Decree: If he means God's decreeing to El • ct, that's one thing, and God's act of Election that's another; 'tis the laſt I inſiſt on, I cannot reach what he means by electing Decree, but God's act of Election, or God's actual chooſing us in Chriſt, before the Foundation of the World, carries in it the Vertue of a legal grant, or it is a fruſtrable Election which it is abominable to ſay of Gods act, and yet ſome mens laying the ſtreſs of all Mens Salvation upon mans Holineſs, muſt reduce Gods election to.

The Decree includes the means and the end] granted moſt freely, yea more than Mr. Williams ſaith, for the Decree not only includes the means and the end, but the means is as well of the eſſence of the Decree as the end is, which I ſuſpect Mr. Williams denies, for he ſaith in the next words, willing the first in order to the last, that is, God wills the means in order to the end; or God wills ſanctification in order to Salvation. But if by only willing the means, he doth not make it a decreeing the means, he falls ſhort of the truth, and makes election not infallible, for God is ſpoken of often in Scripture, of willing things to be done which are not done, as, How often would I have gathered you, and you would not; if he means only ſuch a willing the means which Men may fruſtrate by not complying with his will, then the Decree of the end which is eternal ſalvation that muſt fail, and ſo God's Election is made a conditional one and not abſolute; that is, God Elected ſuch and ſuch to eternal Life, if they would repent and believe, and obey the Goſpel, and not that he Elected them, that they ſhould repent and believe and obey the Goſpel, and this repenting and believing is left to the freedom of mans will, ſo that God may be fruſtrate of his whole decree by their ſo ſtating Election; and I thought it would come to that at laſt, ſo that with Mr. Williams, God's Electing Decree is only to the end Salvation, and he wills the means Sanctification, which will of God is rejected or obeyed, as man's Free-will reſiſts or complies with the motives offered to it; and If Mr. Williams thinks the Dr. did not thus conſider God's Election, and therefore was led into falſe Opinions, he bewrays his own miſapprehenſion of Election, and doth not at all invalidate the Drs. Poſitions concerning the Elect. His next words which he aſſerts concerning Election, ſeem to make good my former ſuſpicion that he makes Gods Election depend on man's will, and for not conſidering which he blames the Dr. and they are theſe.

And as it (the Decree) puts nothing in preſent being, ſo it barrs not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between benefits and Duties by his revealed will. Here muſt be a great miſtake of this learned and acute Gentleman, in ſaying God's Decree puts nothing in preſent being; what, the Decree puts nothing in preſent being? ſure the Decree puts ſomewhat in preſent being, the Decree puts the Decree in preſent being, and is God's eternal unalterable Decree, which the Father and Son and Spirit delighted in during all eternity paſt, and will in all Eternity to come, is this vaniſht into nothing in preſent being? I may ſay God's Decree is ſo far from putting nothing into preſent Being, that it puts all things into paſt, preſent, and future being, for if God be one Eternal act, and all things paſt, preſent, and to come are ever in being in his Eye or knowledge, ſo he puts every thing into preſent being with himſelf, to be manifeſt in their proper Seaſons according to his eternal purpoſe which he purpoſed in himſelf, Epheſ. 1.11. And accordingly the Election of Sons to glory is in preſent being when there are ſuch Sons in being.

This putting nothing into being by God's Election, is the way theſe Men take to evaporate God's Election into Man's Election; 'tis not God doth abſolutely Elect any Man to ſalvation (except the man Chriſt, I hope they grant that) but man Elects himſelf to Salvation, and then Election hath put ſomewhat into preſent being: But though Mr. Williams ſay of Election, it puts nothing into preſent being, I hope all Orthodox Proteſtants will ſay that Election hath put the Elect into an happy ſtate; for Election hath obtained, though the reſt are blinded, and nothing can be laid to the charge of God's Elect, and they are loved with an everlaſting love; and is God's love nothing in preſent being? So it bars not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between Benefits and Duties. No, but it bars man from framing a Model for God, and from making God's Righteouſneſs to be Mans Goſpel Holineſs, and it ba • s man from putting in any leven into the lump of being Juſtifyed freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jeſus, it bars man from ploughing with an Ox, an Aſs, and from wearing a Linſey Wolſey Garment, and from putting new Wine into old Bottles, and from thinking a Branch can bring ſorth any good Grapes, except it be firſt in the Vine the Lord Jeſus, there being no gathering Grapes of Thorns, or Figs of Thiſtles, or any good work from any Soul, till he is in Chriſt, and though there is a bleſſed Connexion of Benefits and Duties, yet no good Duty is done till the Benefit of being united to Chriſt be firſt beſtowed by God; God fixes a Connexion, 'tis true, he makes the Tree good firſt, and then the Fruit good, and this was eternally in the Decree, but man muſt not fix the connexion by making Duties Procurers of Benefits, or making Goſpel threats and promiſes to have in their own Nature a tendency to Convert Souls, without the Operation of the Holy Spirit.

Mr. Williams ſaith, If the Doctor had animadverted that Chriſts ſufferings were the foundation of our Pardon, but not formally our Pardon: This intimates that the Dr. ſaith Chriſts ſufferings were formally our Pardon. I can ſhew how far our great Reformers went beyond Mr. Williams in aſſerting the vertue of the ſufferings of Chriſt in the Pardon of ſin, which if Mr. Williams had conſulted, he would not have reflected as he doth on the Dr. they ſay in the Doctrine of the Church of England, that which is tantamount to a formal pardon in Chriſts Sufferings, they do not amuſe the World with Mr. Williams his Rectoral diſtribution, that he allows to God in pardoning ſinners, upon account of their being found in their Goſpel Holineſs, joyning Faith and Holineſs together, as they entitle to Goſpel Benefits, which Benefits he ſaith, are not from the conformity of Faith and Holineſs, &c. to the Precept, but from their Conformity to the rule of the Promiſe, and ſo plunging poor Souls in his deeps, and amazing them with his rules and Connexions: But theſe Homiliſts give a certain ſound of the Goſpel, and ſay upon the Sermon of the Paſſion, of Good Fryday fol. 177 Such favour did he purchaſe by his Death of his heavenly Father for us, that for the merit thereof, we are now fully in Gods grace again, and clearly diſcharged from our ſin. Theſe are plain wholſome intelligible Goſpel Truths, ſuch as ſuit with the Doctors Teſtimony, they are not Bombaſted with, If we continue to repent and believe to our Death, then our Evangelical Righteouſneſs ſhall juſtifie us at the great day from Satans Charge of unbelief: But, they ſpeak home againſt all Arminianiſm, and ſay that by the merit of his death, we are in Gods grace again, nay we are now in God's grace and that fully, (not we ſhall be) and we are diſcharged from ſin, nay, we are clearly diſcharged from ſin, and in the next words they put it home, and ſay to the confounding all the mincers of the vertue of the death of Chriſt as to the pardon of ſin, thus, No tongue ſurely is able to expreſs the worthineſs of this ſo precious a death, For in this ſtandeth the continual pardon of our daily Offences. Had ſuch a paſſage as this been found in the Notes taken from Doctor Criſp that there is a continual pardon ſtanding, firm in the death of Chriſt, of our preſent daily Offences, this would be accounted dethroning Chriſt by giving more honour to him, than ſome diſtinguiſhers can allow, or if Reverend Mr. Cole had ſaid, that in Chriſts death ſtands the Pardon of our daily offences, nay, there ſtands a continual Pardon, and this mentioned without naming Faith and Repentance, but be our Offences what they may be, there ſtands a continual pardon if we be Chriſtians indeed, ſay theſe holy Reformers, this had been Dangerous Doctrine, as an eminent Divine ſaid of as harmleſs expreſſions of his as theſe in Pinners Hall: I wiſh thoſe worthy Gentlemen who are ſo exceptious againſt the freeneſs of God's Grace in and through Chriſt, and muſt eke it out by our Goſpel Holineſs, would ſeriouſly conſider in the ſimplicity of the Goſpel Spirit of theſe Homiliſts, ſuch expreſſions as theſe of theirs, before they paſs their hard Cenſures of crying dethroning Chriſt, enervating his Laws, becauſe ſome who may be clearer than themſelves, Preach we are juſtified freely by his Grace through the redemption that is in Jeſus without any thing of Mans works cooperating therein or thereto; nothing can be plainer than theſe Reformers newly come out of the School Terms of Popiſh juſtification, for renouncing every thing in man to have any concurrence into our Pardon: But now the ſimplicity of the Goſpel muſt be loſt by ſome Mens Diſtinction of our Pardon by Chriſts death, his ſufferings were not our formal Pardon, but the foundation of it.

I believe none of his Publiſhers of Free-Grace, too freely, ever ſaid Chriſts ſufferings were the formal Pardon of a ſinner, it being perfect Nonſenſe, but I hope they may ſay his ſufferings were a real Expiation of the ſins of all the Elect, without offending moſt of the Subſcribers to Mr. Williams his Book, elſe how could the Apoſtle ſay, by one offering he for ever perfected thoſe that are ſanctified, and he loved us, and waſhed us from our ſins in his blood, having made peace by the Blood of his Croſs.

But in regard plain Scriptures will not go down but Chriſt's Righteouſneſs muſt be our Goſpel Holineſs, I proceed with the Teſtimony of thoſe bleſſed maintainers of the abſolute irreverſible vertue of the ſufferings of Chriſt, which ſufferings contained in them the daily pardon of our offences, and yet theſe I hope Mr. Williams will not ſay have laid down Doctrines to the dethroning Chriſt, though the ſame with Dr. Criſp; they ſay, in the ſame Paſſion Sermon, in fol. 177. In this (Death of Chriſt) resteth our Juſtification. How? Sure Arch-Biſhop Cranmer, and Biſhop Ridley, and you famous Martyrs, you will be Antinomians by and by, have a care Mr. Williams do not ſee this, he'll get 49 and 49 and more, if the Preſs be not in too much haſte to ſubſcribe a Paper to countenance his accuſing you for enervating Chriſts Laws; what, our juſtification reſt in Chriſts death? what juſtified in the ſight of God (who calleth things that are not as though they were, Rom. 4.17. before we believe? Sure either you are miſtaken, or Mr. Williams must retract his black Titles he hath given to this Doctrine; however, Mr. Williams take it, the Doctrine is good, ſtands firm, is allowed, nay, commanded by many Acts of Parliament to be read, and by Queen Elizabeths Letter, to be read again and again, by all Parſons, Vicars and Curates, that our justification resteth in the Death of Christ, and if ſo, having the Apoſtle Paul on my ſide, Being Juſtified by his blood, Rom. 5.9. and the Apoſtle John, Who waſhed us from our ſins in his Blood, and our Statute Law, and the Queens Letter to the Biſhops, that our Juſtification resteth in his Death, I will oppoſe it againſt all Goſpel Mincers, though 1000 times 49, and will ſay that on God's part, all the Elect were juſtifyed when Chriſt died, or rather roſe again for our juſtification, that is, for the Declaration of it, tho' on man's part, no man is perſonally juſtified, 'till Chriſt come, and unite himſelf to him, and work Faith in him, which is always accompanied with all other Graces in Faith, the Seed and Root planted by Chriſt with himſelf, in the Soul; the Homiliſts go on for the farther aſcertaining the benefits that accrew to the Elect in the Death of Chriſt, and ſay, In this (death) we be allowed, how will Mr. Williams and his Friends take this? In this we be allowed; will they ſay, in Chriſts death there is only a Foundation for Pardon, or a Foundation for our being allowed? O 'tis much more doubtleſs; 'tis thus, we now are allowed or accepted in that death of his, that death had ſuch an efficacy, that we being juſtified by it, are allowed or accepted in it; he don't ſay we are accepted for it, or allowed for it, but in it, we are allowed in it; God looks on nothing elſe but that Death of his Son in which he allows or accepts of thoſe Sheep his Son dyed for; and that this is the meaning the next words ſhew, they ſaying, In this is purchaſed the everlaſting Health of our Souls: Ay, ſaith Mr. Williams, now they lean on my ſide, Chriſt purchaſed this for them, that is to ſay, provided they repent, believe, walk holy; no, 'tis not with that connexion, tho' God works all thoſe Graces where Chriſts death is imputed. But they ſay everlaſting Health is purchaſed, and it is in this death of Chriſt, there, 'tis firmly fixt on that unmoveable Rock, without mentioning any previous Qualifications as terms or conditions to concur to our Title, for the Title is freely given in the Purchaſe, and the Qualifications are wrought by the Purchaſer, all of Grace; and as ſure as he laid down his life for his Sheep, ſo ſurely they ſhall come to him, the Father drawing: But without any limitation to any Condition, 'tis aſſerted plainly by above 49 of theſe holy Reformers, that in this (Death of Chriſt) (I ſay in it, which is more than by it) in this is purchaſed the everlaſting health of our Souls, and we may not think that Chriſt will loſe his Purchaſe, he having paid the Price; Salvation is ſure and ſecure without any Ifs and Ands, and connexions and diſtributions, as their next words plainly ſay, Yea, there is none other thing, (than the death of Chriſt) that can be named under Heaven, to ſave our Souls, but this only work of Chriſts precious Offering of his Body upon the Altar of the Croſs. Here are words without Sophiſticating connexions, ſaving our Souls is the thing aimed at; now ſay they, he hath not only purchaſed it, ſo will ſay moſt Arminians, but nothing elſe out the Death of Chriſt ſaves us, name what you will, name Repenting, Believing, Goſpel-Holineſs, bleſſed graces, all, but what have they to do with Salvation? they are found in the Subjects ſaved, they being the free gift of God; but as for Salvation, as for the everlaſting Health of our Souls, that was wrought out long before our complying with the Goſpel rule, and made firm to all the Seed, the foundation of God ſtanding ſure, this work was over; and ſo allowed) by theſe great men) when Chriſt died, and ſo well and effectually done, that nothing can be named under Heaven to have any thing to do in ſaving our Souls but this Death of Chriſt, tho' I grant many things tend to the manifeſting of it to us, and making us meet for it, as Faith and Holineſs, being the things that muſt and will accompany Salvation.

Are you for works, for Conditions? 'Tis this only work (ſay they) ſaves our ſouls, Chriſts precious offering of his Body upon the Altar of the Croſs, then and upon that Altar the material Croſs on which our Lord Jeſus hung and died, upon that the work of ſaving our Souls was finiſhed, when he cryed out, it is finiſhed; ſo that here is more than a Foundation for pardon, for here is Juſtification, nay more than Juſtification, here is everlaſting Health and Salvation of our Souls, wrought upon the Croſs of Chriſt 1657 years ago, or thereabouts; this was good Divinity in our great Grand-Father's days, and in Dr Criſps Eyes and Lips, that our Juſtification and Salvation was really, actually in Chriſts Death, as they ſay, and ſo confirmed by every Parliament that ever Confirmed the Book of Common Prayer; but now a poor ſinners ſalvation muſt be tortured with our perſonal holineſs, coming in with an as it were, as the Apoſtle ſaith, Rom. 9.32. that is to ſay, with our inherent Righteouſneſs, concurring, complying with conformity to Goſpel Rule under threats and promiſes, or elſe we are for the Dethroning Chriſt, for enervating his Laws, and the Rabble that know nothing of either Juſtification or Sanctification, ſhall be let looſe upon aſſerters of Free Grace, by Mr. Williams crying out, O theſe be men againſt Goſpel Holineſs, when their Oppoſers know in their Conſcience, there is ſuch a ſtrain of Holineſs all along in Dr. Criſps Book, that though it be againſt the grain, they cannot but own they believe him a holy Perſon, and well they may, if they compare his Sermons on Free Grace, teaching to deny Ungodlineſs, with his other Sermons on our ſins laid upon Chriſt, in the laſt ſide of which Vol. fol. 444. the Dr. ſaith, For my own part I abhor nothing in the World ſo much as this, namely, a licentious undertaking to continue in any ſin, becauſe that ſuch fulneſs of Grace hath abounded; and I ſhall recommend to them (if any ſuch be here) the reading of the Epiſtle of Jude, where they may ſee the fearful wrath of God upon ſuch perſons as abuſe the Grace of God to ſin: O Beloved, let not the love of the Lord God, in Jeſus Christ thus manifested, be ſo baſely requited at your hands, ſeeing the Lord hath ſo freely loved you, and given Chriſt to you, that you might be to the Praiſe of the Glory of his Grace in a Godly and Chriſtian Converſation whereunto you are Ordained, for you are Created in Chriſt Jeſus to good Works, that you ſhould walk in them: and I beſeech you always to remember that you cannot anſwer the free love of God toward you, any other way, but by ſhewing it in a fruitful Converſation in the World, and conſidering that one end, for which the Lord did redeem you, was, that you might be a peculiar people to himſelf zealous of good Works, Titus 2.24. Thus ends the third Volume. To ſtop the mouths of Gain-ſayers, eſpecially Mr. Williams, who accuſes the Dr. to be for Licentious Doctrine; but becauſe our holineſs muſt not come in to concur to our Juſtification, this is to enervate Chriſts Laws.

But to our purpoſe again, The Homily ſaith, as to the reſpect Chriſts ſufferings have to the Pardon of our ſins, though his ſufferings be not a formal pardon, as ſaith Mr. Williams, as a piece of nonſenſe charged upon Dr. Criſp, yet his Sufferings are, tant-amount to a Pardon in the Account of thoſe holy compilers of the Homilies, who ſay in fol. 178. His Paſſion is the Ranſom and whole amends for our ſin. If ſo, then with ſubmiſſion, I may ſay this whole amends for ſin, is in the Eye of a juſt and gracious God tant-amount to a Pardon, for God cannot but acquit where amends is made, though the Perſon acquitted is never the better for it as to his Conſcience, till he believe in the Lord Jeſus; no more than a Criminal in New-gate condemned for Treaſon, is the more at peace in his mind, when his Friend hath got a Pardon for him, in his Pocket, till he ſee it or believes it; but will any man in his ſenſes ſay this Criminal is not really benefited by the Pardon his Friend got him, till he ſee and plead this Pardon, much leſs may Mr. Williams ſay, that an Elect perſon is not benefited by the Juſtification by Chriſts Reſurrection, becauſe 'tis not applyed to him till believing.

They go on in fol. 185. and ſay, Chriſt being perfect God, and the Son of God, gave his Body to be bruiſed and broken on the Croſs for our ſins; this Mr. Williams will grant, but they go on and ſay, our Saviour Chriſt hath delivered us from ſin, this Mr. Williams muſt temper with ifs and Connexions; they proceed, Yet not ſo that we ſhall be free from committing ſin, but ſo that it ſhall not be imputed to our Condemnation: So they have allowed a benefit to Believers, before they believe, though Mr. Williams queſtions it, and affirm Chriſt on the Croſs delivered from ſin, bearing it away, ſo as it ſhall not be imputed to them, and whether this be not more than a bare foundation of our Pardon, it being a real making amends for ſin; a real juſtification, a real ſaving our Souls in theſe great mens account, and in the Nations account; let Mr. Williams ponder, and not conclude that Dr. Criſp entertained theſe Opinions which dethrone Chriſt, as he calls it, by not animadverting that Chriſts ſufferings were barely a foundation of pardon, and let him muſe what his vilifying this Doctrine of the Church of Englamd will amount to.

To proceed, he ſaith, that the ſins of the Elect, They are not forgiven immediately upon, nor meerly by his enduring thoſe ſufferings; this is directly contrary to the Doctrine in the Homily, 177. which ſaith, In this death of Chriſt, ſtandeth our continual Pardon. I hope he will allow that Chriſt did put away ſin by the Sacrifice of himſelf, becauſe God ſaith it without any Trope, or Ifs or Connexions, Heb. 9.26. Alſo he will allow that before Chriſt ſat on the right hand of God, he purged our ſins by himſelf, Heb. 1.3. And that at the end of ſeventy Weeks he made an end of ſin, and brought in everlaſting righteouſneſs, Dan. 9.24. and bare our ſins in his Body, and was the Lamb of God that took away the ſins of the World. John 1.29. If ſo that ſins be ſatisfyed for, and if put away, and if purged and made an end of and born away, and took away, then what will remain to be forgiven? even nothing; and yet ſtill neither the Dr. or any I know of, hold that the Conſcience of a ſinner is acquitted hereby, or at all by Chriſts death, till Chriſt be applyed by Faith, with all his Benefits to the Soul; ſo that though with Mr. Williams our ſins be not forgiven immediately upon Chriſts death, as pertaining to the Conſcience of the Elect ſinner dyed for, yet by Mr. Williams leave, God is not ſo hard a Creditor to keep the Debt upon Record, when he is ſatisfied for it, and when 'tis blotted out by the Blood of Chriſt, ſure he will allow that in the Court of Heaven the Book is croſt, and no debt appears againſt the Elect after Chriſt made payment; ſure this will not be gainſaid but by thoſe who deny Chriſts ſatisfaction, which many will nibble at, tho' 'tis too plain Popery, to ſay downright that Chriſt did not make full ſatisfaction to God by his Death, for the ſins of all the Elect.

Sins are not forgiven meerly by his enduring Sufferings, W. What, is our Goſpel Holineſs to help our Faith; Holineſs? &c. Yes, for ſaith he, There were to intervene a Goſpel Promiſe of pardon, the work of the Spirit for a Conformity to the rule of the Promiſe, in the perſon to be pardoned, and a Judicial act of Pardon by that promiſe on the Perſon thus conformed to the Rule thereof; here's a tedious leſſon for a poor terrified Soul to get by heart, when the Spirit of God hath convinced him of his miſerable condition by ſin, when he cries to a Goſpel Miniſter, good Sir, for the Lords ſake, tell me how I may get a pardon into my Boſom; I have heard, may he ſay, God ſaith, there is forgiveneſs with him, 'tis now ready by him, that he may be feared. I have heard that when the Jaylor cryed out, What ſhall I do to be ſaved, The Apoſtle bid him only believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved: I have heard and read that in Epheſ. 1. and Col. 1. the Apoſtle ſaith in him we have Redemption through his Blood, forgiving of ſins, ſo that as ſoon as I have him by faith, I have forgiveneſs, and I am bid to fly for Refuge to the hope that is ſet before me, which I take to be Jeſus my City of Refuge and not my Goſpel Holineſs: Now good Sir, may this poor Soul ſay, what ſhall I do under the load of my ſins? may I take the Apoſtles words, and Chriſts call, Come to me, and you ſhall find rest for your Souls, as ſoon as ever you find your ſelves weary and heavy laden; or muſt I ſtay till I find by a long ſeven or ten or 38 years lying at the Pool, ſearching if I can find Mr. Williams draught agree with me, that I have attained to a full compleat anſwering the Rule of the Goſpel, which he calls conformity to the rule of the promiſe? Muſt I ſtay till I can underſtand Mr. Williams School terms of a Judicial Act of Pardon by that promiſe to the Perſon thus conformed to the Rule; that is to ſay, muſt I ſtay till I can love my Enemies, they being my Neighbours as well as my ſelf, till I can turn my left Cheek patiently to him, that ſmites me on my right, till I can, having two Coats, give one to him that hath none, till I can hate Father, Mother, ſell all and follow Chriſt, and in every thing conform to Goſpel Rule; in a word, till I am perfect as my Father which is in Heaven is perfect, before I may dare believe my ſins are forgiven? Or may I ſatisfie my ſelf with Dr. Criſps quotation, Look to me and be ye ſaved, as the Serpent was only lookt to for healing? I ſay if a poor Soul ſhould put this to a Goſpel Miniſter, would he not anſwer, the plain ſhort Scripture way is beſt, hearken to Jeſus, ſaying, come take the Water of Life freely, this is the work of God, that ye believe in him the Father hath ſent. If you have me you have Life, as many as receive me, that is, believe on my Name, are Sons of God. As for Mr. Williams diſtinctions, Connexions, Judicial act of Pardon, he may pleaſe the Schools with them, but there is more nouriſhing food in one cal • of Chriſt, Come to me, come, come, buy Wine, milk and honey without money, without price, in ſuch a promiſe well preſt, than in a thouſand of Mr. Williams diſtinctions.

Next I muſt attack an odd expreſſion ſavouring of God's diſpenſing with the breach of his righteous Law without ſatisfaction, which is the back door of Arminianiſm, wherein creeps in mans free will, and his good works concurring to his ſalvation; the expreſſion which I cannot digeſt, is this, Mr. W. ſaith, a continuance in a ſtate of death with a bar to the bleſſing are not threatned (in the Goſpel) againſt every degree of ſin, as the Covenant of Works did. This is Mr. Williams ſenſe of the Goſpel, and its differing from the Law or Covenant of Works, viz. the Law condemned for every ſin, but there are ſome degrees of ſin, the Goſpel allows, or doth not threaten Death for, which I ſuppoſe without wronging him, I may inſtance thus: The Law condemned a Man for killing his Brother, and for hating his Brother, and for ill will to his Brother; but the Goſpel hath compounded the matter, and made God reconcileable through Faith in Chriſt, for a mans murdering his Brother, but God will take no notice of a man's ill will to his Brother, that degree of ſin there is no threatning of Death for; if this be his ſenſe, I take it to be far wide of the Apoſtles ſenſe, when he ſaid the blood of Chriſt cleanſeth from all ſin, that is to ſay, there is as real need of the vertue of the blood of Chriſt to cleanſe from a vain thought as from murder, though I do not ſay both are alike heinous, yet both need the blood of Chriſt to waſh them away, or there is no ſtanding Juſtified at God's Bar. Oh we ſhould have a care of letting this poyſon down, that any ſin can be pardoned but by the blood of Chriſt cleanſing it, for he that is guilty of one ſin is guilty of all; ſo that to ſay there is any degree of ſin under the Goſpel againſt which death is not threatned will amount in the concluſion, to render the blood of Chriſt not needful to take away that degree of ſin: O ſin, ſin, how ſmall ſoever, muſt not be ſo treated, for if the grain of Muſtard ſeed, ſmall faith, but true, will grow to a great Tree, and reach to Heaven; this grane of Henbane, the ſmalleſt degree of ſin, if not accounted for in the Goſpel by the blood of Chriſt, will grow to a vaſt depth even the Regions of darkneſs and Hell.

Upon this dangerous poſition of Mr. Williams, That a continuance in a ſtate of death and a bar to the Bleſſing, are not threatned againſt every degree of ſin, as the Covenant of works did, Mr. Williams propounds a ſplendid queſtion, Can any doubt this to be the grace of the Goſpel Promiſe: O profound grace of the Goſpel promiſe, it doth not bar from bleſſing, nor continue in a ſtate of death, for every degree of ſin, a Heaven-born Soul, that lives day by day on the Blood and Fleſh of Jeſus, and feaſts on the infinite love of God in Jeſus, would have thought that an eminent Miniſter of the Goſpel, a Gentleman of great parts, ſupported by ſome of the greateſt names in our Iſrael, would hav • thought that when Mr. Williams was reſcuing the Lord Jeſus (as he intimates) from the dethroning Principles of Dr. Criſp (as he pleaſes to call them) and when he is bringing back the Lord Jeſus to his Throne, one would think, I ſay, when Mr. Williams is celebrating the glory of the Grace of the Goſpel promiſe, he ſhould have called for the aid of the holy Spirit, to help him, and have ſaid ſomewhat to this purpoſe: O the heighth and depth, O the ſuperlative Excellency of the Love of God in Chriſt, that he ſhould love us, and waſh us from our ſins in his blood, that the blood of Chriſt cleanſeth us from all ſin, that he hath bleſſed us with all ſpiritual Bleſſings in heavenly places in Chriſt. Thus our Lord Jeſus is to be enthroned, though it comes too near Dr. Criſp his way of dethroning Chriſt, no, this is not his Clue or way to raiſe Monuments of Glory to our Bleſſed Lord, but thus he celebrates him by ſniping off a Lap of his Garment as David did Sauls; can any doubt but this (the not being in a ſtate of Death for every degree of ſin) is the grace of the Goſpel promiſe: If he had ſaid this is a grace of the Goſpel, it had been a degree of modeſty in Mr. Williams to the Goſpel, though it were not a truth, but to ſay 'tis the Grace, and ſo the grace that none can doubt of it, this needs a remark, and the chief that I ſhall make, is, that I will beg of God, and now do, that I and Mr. Williams alſo may have the grace of the Goſpel promiſe in a more full ſtream than that a continuance in a ſtate of Death, and a bar to the bleſſing, are not threatned againſt every degree of ſin, as the Covenant of works did; but that we may ſwim in the Rivers of infinite Love; that God choſe us in Chriſt before the World, and gave us to the Lord Jeſus, that no ſin ſhould pluck us out of his hand, and that by one offering he hath for ever perfected thoſe that are ſanctifyed, ſo that now there is no more conſcience of ſin, becauſe where ſin abounds grace doth much more abound, and yet ſtill for every ſin and for every degree of ſin we may not think our ſelves freed from Condemnation for it, by vertue of the Goſpel promiſe relaxing the Covenant of Works, but I beg that he and I may for our cleanſing our Conſciences from the leaſt degree of ſin, make uſe of the Apoſtles remedy. If any man ſin (be it in any the leaſt degree) we have an Advocate with the Father Jeſus Chriſt the Righteous, who is the propitiation for our ſins; ay that's the buſineſs, that's it we muſt truſt to, he is the propitiation for our ſins of ſin in the leaſt degree, it muſt have this participation, or wo unto us; this I implore of God in the name of Jeſus, that I and Mr. Williams may by a daily applying to this propitiation, get our Conſciences free from every degree of ſin.

Before I leave this clauſe, I reflect that the greateſt Grammarian may make blunders, which I note, that Mr. Williams in the next Edition may mend this, that ſo the World may not think Mr. Williams allows falſe Grammar, as this Clauſe gives ſuſpicion, or I muſt go to School again: The falſe Grammar in this clauſe, is in theſe words, At the Covenant of Works did, which follows theſe words, And a continuance in a ſtate of death, with a bar to the bleſſing, are not threatned againſt every degree of ſin, as the Covenant of Works did, ſo that the ſentence in brief by Mr. Williams ordering runs thus, Death and a Bar are not threatned, as the Covenant of Works did, and if this be ſenſe or Grammar, it muſt be by ſome Outlandiſh Figure and Rule, I ſuppoſe he means thus, Death and the Bar are not threatned as in the Covenant of Works they were, and not as the Covenant of works did.

Mr. Williams next makes his Queries to confirm • is aſſertion that every degree of ſin is not threatned under the Goſpel with Death, and for confirmation of it, ſaith, Doth it (the Goſpel) promiſe Life to all men, however vile and impenitent they be: I confeſs this rimes like brains and ſtairs, he propounds that every degree of ſin doth not bar the bleſſing of the Goſpel, and Confirms it by this, the Goſpel don't promiſe Life to the vileſt and impenitent. If it don't promiſe life to the vileſt and impenitent, doth it follow that any degree of ſin can be ſo ſmall as not to deſerve death under the Goſpel? A ſtrange Inference, and ſtranger Doctrine, as if he had ſaid thus, there are ſome ſins under the Goſpel do not deſerve death, becauſe the Goſpel doth not promiſe life to the vileſt and moſt impenitent.

But to leave the Illogicalneſs of his Argument, I'll conſider his Queſtion as a poſitive Aſſertion ſingle and by it ſelf.

The Goſpel doth not promiſe Life to all men, however vile and impenitent they be, ſaith Mr. Williams, and I never heard of any that ever ſaid it did; that all men of all Nations, ſince the World began to the end of it, had promiſe of Life by the Goſpel, and then Mr. Williams rambling Queſtion ſuppoſes ſome ſuch Univerſalians there are, but to help and amend the queſtion it may be Mr. Williams intends thus; Doth the Goſpel promiſe Life to all that hear it, however vile, &c. I anſwer, none that he oppoſes ever aſſerted it, as I ſee, they with every good Chriſtian ſay it promiſes life to all that truly believe in the Lord Jeſus, nay, it promiſes life to all the Elect, But the grand Queſtion is ſtill, if it promiſe Life to the Elect, however vile and impenitent they be; this I take to be Mr. Williams Queſtion, now if he mean that the Goſpel do not promiſe life to thoſe that continue vile and impenitent, to thoſe that are never effectually called by the grace of God. I am ſatisfied he muſt fight with the Air, for none diſputes him in that point, but if he mean that the Goſpel doth not promiſe Life, to the chief of ſinners, to th • moſt vile and moſt impenitent, which cannot be worſe than the chief of ſinners, if they be elected choſen Veſſels; if he aſſerts this he miſtakes, but I will not queſtion his Integrity to the Goſpel in this point; I fear there lies ſomewhat at the Bottom that wi •• •• t bear the ſtandard or touchſtone of the word, that is, that God promiſes Life and Salvation, upon our repentance and growing from vile to good; for he doth not promiſe it to the vile and impenitent: If this be his meaning, that there is no promiſe of life to an Elect perſon till he return from vileneſs, and till he repent, this is as near Arminianiſm as four pence is to a groat, and as far from the ſcripture as the Weſt is from the Eaſt, for that ſaith in Titus 1.2. In hope of Eternal life, which God that cannot lye promiſed before the World began, ſo that I conclude againſt Mr. Williams with the Apoſtle, that the Goſpel promiſe was before the foundation of the World, for Life and Salvation to all the Elect according to the Promiſe of God, though they be the chief of ſinners, however vile and impenitent they are, till the Goſpel comes and turns them from darkneſs to light, from dumb Idols to ſerve the living God, and the Goſpel promiſe when it firſt touches their Hearts by the Spirit of God, though it finds them ſo vile and impenitent it does not leave them ſo, but firſt puts in a new ſpiritual life and carries it on in ſanctification more and more every day, and in this ſenſe I give my Judgment, the Goſpel promiſes life to all men that are Elected, that is, all that are by vertue of their Election effectually called, which promiſe was before the World began, this cannot be too much inſiſted it, becauſe it is for the praiſe of the glory of his grace, and hath no tendency to leſſen the true value of the bleſſed graces of Repentance and new obedience which flow from and do give life to the promiſe.

His next Queſtion is, or doth it, (the Goſpel) threaten damnation or a continuance of it on any true Penitent believing Godly man, becauſe he is imperfect. This is as wild a queſtion as the former, that was, doth the Goſpel ſave all thus, doth it damn all, for what man lives and ſins not? So that every true Penitent is imperfect, and this queſtion needed not be askt, but only to inſinuate, that true Penitence believing and godlineſs come in equal ſharers, in intituling Men to ſalvation by Chriſt; that they go hand in hand to give an Intereſt in the promiſe, only Repentance muſt take the Right hand and go next the Wall, though the Apoſtle ſay, juſtified by Faith, we are ſaved by grace through Faith, yet Repentance and Godlineſs will crowd in for a little boaſting, though it rob Chriſt, whereas true faith gives him the glory of all, by being the hand that receives all from Chriſt.

In the next place, we have the yet moſt dangerous poſition for eſtabliſhing our works in the buſineſs of our Salvation, in this long ſentence to bring in a degree of obedience, a little finger we muſt have in the Pye; or it will not be well made; he brings it in thus, This change of the Sanction. (that is, of Life from Goſpel Obedience inſtead of the Law Obedience) ſuppoſes the death of Chriſt, and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience, wherein God hath provided for his own glory, while he promiſes Life by forgiveneſs to imperfect man, and yet he inſiſts on ſome degree of Obedience, to which of his meer grace he enableth us. Here's a long ſeries or train to bring in a degree of Obedience, firſt the ſanction is changed, this needs pondering; next this ſuppoſes the death of Chriſt. O fit, what only ſuppoſes the death of Chriſt, is his death to have no better encomium upon it, one would think that glorious price and ranſom of our redemption, ſhould have been ſet off with a glorious title, as thus, this is owing to the infinite love and mercy of God, in the Unvaluable purchaſe by the bleſſed death of Chriſt. But repenting, believing, a godly life, that muſt have the high praiſes, the Death of our bleſſed Lord Jeſus muſt come off with a ſuppoſition; this ſuppoſes the Death of Chriſt, 〈◊〉 the next place, it ſuppoſes the honouring the Law; and is that all, doth it not ſuppoſe the ſatisfying the Law? I find not a word of that, that Chriſts death ſatisfyed the Law: O there is care taken that ſtring muſt not be harped upon, it would drown the ſweet melody of ſome degrees of Obedience, and our repenting, believing, and godlineſs, which though excellent in their place, yet are not to eclips the glory of our Lord Jeſus in becoming the end of the Law.

I muſt ſay 'tis a mean buſineſs to ſay Chriſts death honoured the Law, ſo Cranmers death honoured the Goſpel, but Chriſts death to all ſound Proteſtants, was the end of the Law, by his fulfilling our Righteouſneſs; but there muſt come in with it ſome degree of our Obedience, this ſeems pretty broad compounding the matter with God for the ſin of man, Chriſt honoured the Law by his Obedience, yet God inſiſts on ſome degree of our Obedience, this looks like a linſey woolſey Garment, but it muſt be laid aſide, for it will not prove the wedding Garment, the Bridegroom will ſcorn that any of his Gueſts ſhall ſit down with the glorious Garment of his righteouſneſs, patcht up with the degrees of our Obedience. If the King ſhould ſend a Garment for Mr. Williams to come to Court in and ſtand before him, I am confident he would wear that and that only, and not go about to clap a patch here and a patch there of his own Coat, much leſs will he do it to the Lord Jeſus on ſerious thoughts, Wherein God hath provided for his own Glory: But it is but a mean proviſion, if Chriſt have only honoured the Law, and not fully ſatisfyed it, and if our Obedience muſt come in with his Sons Obedience, can is be thought that our imperfect obedience provides for God's glory, by joyning it with Chriſts moſt perfect Obedience; God indeed hath provided well for his glory in mans Salvation only from his own free Grace through the Blood of Chriſt, but Mr. Williams makes but a ſlender providing for God's glory, while he leaves room for the fleſh to glory in his preſence by his own obedience, is this that no fleſh may glory in his ſight. But Mr. Williams takes care to prevent that (he'll ſay) by the laſt clauſe, that God of his men grace enables us to this our Obedience. I anſwer, not in the leaſt doth this take off from glorying, for though 'tis Gods grace inables to Obedience, yet the Obedience is ſtill our work, and the Scripture ſaith plainly, not of works, lest any boast.

Every breath I breath, is of God's grace, and if God ſhould enable me to ſpeak for two hours together to the King Lords, and Commons in Parliament, ſo as to perſwade them to imploy none but thoſe that truely fear God in any place of truſt, ſhould I not be apt to applaud my ſelf, though I ſhould ſtill own the ability and efficacy to perſwade them was of God, how much more will any poor Creature boaſt if his Obedience hath any hand in the ſalvation of his Soul? O that we could cry, grace, grace, not to us but to thy name be the praiſe, and as for our Obedience, cry all our righteouſneſs is as filthy Raggs, and ſo let us ſet the Crown on the head of our Lord Jeſus, ſay continually To the King; eternal, immortal, inviſible, the only wiſe God, be honour and glory for ever, for his being all in all, Author and finiſher, Alpha and Omega, in our Salvation.

He promiſes Life by forgiveneſs to imperfect Man, This is the next ſtep to bring in ſome degree of our obedience, but a falſe ſtep, if by promiſing Life, by forgiveneſs he excludes Chriſts ſatisfying Gods Juſtice, as that which leads to forgiveneſs, of which there is not a word in this Paragraph, and doth God promiſe life barely by forgiveneſs, this is a ſorry and nonſenſical account of mans Redemption, and Salvation.

And yet he inſists on ſome degree of Obediences, ſaith Mr. Williams. Here comes the great maſter wheel by which our Salvation is ſecured, Chriſts death is ſuppoſed, the Law hath honour by Chriſts Obedience, life is promiſed, but yet God inſiſts in our Obedience, at leaſt on ſome degree of it. That God inſiſts on our obedience, and on more than ſome degree of it, muſt be owned by all, for God inſiſts on our being holy as he is holy; God inſiſts on our loving him with all our heart; God inſiſts that we be blameleſs and unreproveable in his ſight; this is more than ſome degree of Obedience, and it is our duty doubtleſs to endeavour to be perfect, as our Father which is in Heaven is perfect. But this hath nothing to do in our obtaining Life, and is not ſuch an Obedience, as Mr. Williams ſaith God inſiſts on: He is more eaſie in his terms to poor ſinners, than to run it ſo high; well, what is it God inſiſts on? he in effect, told us before, 'tis a true penitent believing Godly Man, this God inſiſts on▪ this is his ſome degree of Obedience, that God inſiſts on, while he promiſes Life by forgiveneſs, and is this the true Interpretation of theſe Texts, While • we were Enemies, we were reconciled, and, he juſtifies the Ungodly, but from ſuch gloſſes I deſire to be delivered.

Well, we muſt be true Penitent; we muſt have Faith that Chriſt honoured the Law, and we muſt be Godly perſons, that is, we muſt walk in all godlineſs and honeſty, or we be not godly perſons, and when that is done then we may come to God and ſay, Lord we have done what thou commandeſt, we repent, believe, and are Godly, though we are not perfect, yet we are truly penitent, believing and Godly, 〈…〉 life; if this be nor dividing ſhares with the Lord Jeſus, in the honour of ſalvation, what is? No mortal man will ſay that our perfect Obedience muſt come in toward our juſtification, there being no ſuch thing in the World, and to ſay that Chriſt merited that our imperfect Obedience ſhould be accepted for perfect, is to ſay Chriſts death was needleſs, for God might as well have ſaved the honour of his Righteouſneſs and juſtice, when Man had broken his Law, by an abſolute Forgiveneſs, without Chriſts death, as to make his death of no more value, than to purchaſe that our lame Obedience ſhould paſs for firm, perfect Obedience? But God is Juſt in Juſtifying, God hath received full, compleat ſatisfaction from the Lord Jeſus, and now ſaith, Come take the Water of Life freely, and by a Holy Converſation, glorifie me and do good to your ſelves and others.

I paſs by examining his next cloudy expreſſion, in theſe words, viz. This (life on ſome degree of our Obedience) the Covenant of Redemption ſecures to the Elect, tho the grant therein is pleadable only by Chriſt, as the Stipulating Party for us, and our perſonal claim depends on the Goſpel Covenant wherein Chriſt is Mediator; which is liable enough to Exception, for his ſaying Gods grant is not pleadable by us, but only by Chriſt, whereby Mr. Williams makes way to bring in the Goſpel Covenant of our degree of our Obedience, before we can claim any thing of Chriſt as Mediator; this I paſs, and If come to his plain downright oppoſing the way of Salvation, according as it is delivered us by the Apoſtle, by holy Martyrs, by the Homiliſts, by famous Divines, beſides Dr. Criſp, which follows, in theſe unſcriptural words of Mr. Williams his Goſpel Sanction, ſaith he, determins as certain a Rule as happineſs and miſery, as the Law of Works did, though it be not the ſame 〈◊〉 it fixeth true repentance and Faith unfeigned to be the terms of Pardon, ſo when it promiſeth Heaven to the ſincerely holy perſevering Believer, it fixeth ſincere Holineſs and Perſeverance in Faith as the terms of Poſſeſſing Heaven. Hence the Ʋſe of Faith, holineſs, &c. to thoſe benefits is not from their conformity to the Precept, but their conformity to the rule of the Promiſe.

This long Paragraph of the Goſpel Sanction of Mr. Williams his drawing, I take to be as clearly oppoſite to the Apoſtle Paul, as Arminius was to our Reformed Orthodox Divines, for Mr. Williams his Faith, Holineſs, and the bottomleſs boundleſs, endleſs, &c. are brought in as the terms of poſſeſſing Heaven, and not only ſo, for that they might be as fruits of Union to Chriſt, but they are ſo, the terms as they are a Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe, even as the Law of works was to the Rule of the Precept, that is, as the Law of works required a perfect Obedience in Conformity to the Precept for obtaining Life. So the Goſpel Sanction requires Faith, Holineſs, &c. in conformity to the promiſe for obtaining Life, which in our ordinary Dialect is, that what perfect Obedience obtained under the Law, that imperfect Faith and holineſs, &c. doth under the Goſpel, which in plain terms is, Chriſt hath purchaſed that our Faith, Holineſs, perſeverance in new obedience under the Goſpel, ſhould paſs inſtead of perfect Obedience under the Law, which is as diametrically oppoſite to the Apoſtles, not of Works, leſt any boaſt, as Eaſt is to West, and though Mr. Williams ſay, theſe are not Works of the Law, yet they are works and good works, and ſuch as if brought in for anſwering the Goſpel Sanction, as perfect works did the Law, is the homeſt ſtab to the true Goſpel that ever was printed by any Arminian, for there is not a tittle in all the Goſpel that our Faith and holineſs are ſo, our terms of happineſs in conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe, as obedience to the Law of works was in conformity to the Rule of the Precept; the Apoſtles ſanction is quite otherwiſe, he faith not by works of righteouſneſs, but by his grace he hath ſaved us, and not of works, leſt any boaſt, if of works then grace is no more g •••• is not Faith a work, holineſs is it not working; perſeverance in Obedienc • 〈◊〉 it not working? and muſt theſe come in to anſwer the Promiſe, as perfect Obedience anſwered the Law? What becomes then of Chriſts Obedience for us, to anſwer the Law? 'tis quite ſhut out of doors, and his Satisfaction too, by this Scheme and Sanction, this is ſo far from giving Chriſt the ſole honour of being our perfect, compleat, alone, only Saviour, Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, Sanctification and Redemption, that it quite excludes him in every part of Salvation, but only his making way that we ſhould ſave our ſelves, his obtaining by his Life and Death, imputed to us, that God would be ſo kind to us, and unjuſt to himſelf, that our Faith, Holineſs, &c. ſhould anſwer the promiſe as unſinning Obedience ſhould have anſwered the Law; this is making God a very cheat to himſelf, to ſet up a pure holy Law, the perfect Copy of his will, and mans breach of it ſhould be made up by our imperfect, weak faith and holineſs; which hath no more proportion to the infinitely holy Law, than a braſs Farthing hath to a World full of Diamonds, nor ſo much; and yet ſo eaſie a Merchant this Doctrine would make God, by making our pretended conformity to the Promiſe to anſwer the enjoyned perfect conformity to the Law. But becauſe thoſe of this Opinion cannot for ſhame bring it in to ſtand alone, that our Conformity to the Promiſe ſhould anſwer inſtead of obedience to the law, therefore they bring in Chriſt to purchaſe this priviledge, that is, that Chriſt purchaſed that God ſhould cheat his holineſs and righteouſneſs with a ſham of Mens invention, whereas the Doctrine of the Goſpel is, that God is juſt, and the juſtifier of thoſe that believe in Jeſus, who in our ſtead fulfilled all righteouſneſs, for us and ſo became the end of the Law for righteouſneſs ſake.

And that our Faith and Holineſs with the unmeaſurable, &c. have nothing to do in our juſtification or Salvation, as a conformity to the Goſpel Promiſe, even as perfect obedience had in conformity to the Precept (or Covenant of works) I ſhall ſhew farther by the opinion of ſound Orthodox Writers, and begin with that famous Martyr in Scotland, burned Anno 1532. for adhering to ſalvation by Jeſus Chriſt without works, in his Treatiſe ſet forth by Mr. John Frith an Engliſh Martyr in the ſame Cauſe Burned in 1533. he hath theſe Expreſſions, viz. No manner of works make us right wiſe, and no works make us unright wiſe; if any evil works make us unrighteous, then the contrary works ſhould make us righteous, the proof is we believe that a man ſhall be justifyed without works, Rom. 3. and we believe in Jeſus Chriſt that we may be justified by the faith of Chriſt and not by the deeds of the Law, good works make not a good man, nor evil works an evil Man, but a good man bringeth forth good works, and an evil man evil works, good Fruit makes not the Tree good, nor evil Fruit the Tree evil, but a good Tree beareth good Fruit, and an evil Tree evil fruit: If works make us neither righteous nor unrighteous, then thou wilt ſay it maketh no matter what we do. I anſwer, if thou do evil it is a ſure Argument thou art evil, and wantest Faith; if thou do good it is a ſure Argument thou art good and haſt Faith. Here is no ſophiſtication of Faith, Holineſs, Obedience, &c. anſwering the Rule of the Goſpel promiſe as perfect Obedience anſwered the Law, and moreover he gives the reaſon why we are ſo ſaved by Chriſt, Becauſe, ſaith he, Thou madeſt the fault and he ſuffered the pain, and that for the love he had for thee before thou waſt born; now ſith he was puniſhed for thee, thou ſhalt not be puniſhed: Finally he hath delivered thee from Condemnation, all evil, and deſireth nought of thee (mark that) but that thou wilt acknowledge what he hath done for thee, and bear it in mind, and help others for his ſake, as he hath helped thee for nought: Thou wilt ſay, Shall we then do no good deeds? I ſay not ſo, but I ſay we ſhould do no good works for the intent to get the Inheritance of Heaven, or the remiſſion of ſin. Thus this bleſſed Martyr aſſerted the Goſpel, in theſe truths worth laying down ones life for; but I hope none will be put to lay down their life for aſſerting our imperfect Obedience, anſwers the Goſpel, as Adams perfect Obedience, If he had had it, would have anſwered the Law, for any to die upon ſuch a point, would be to be a Martyr for his own Righteouſneſs, not for aſſerting Chriſts; now comes Mr. Frith, and gives his Obſervations as full of Antinomianiſm as his Author Mr. Hamilton, or as Dr. Criſp, and juſt ſuch an Antinomian as the A. Paul was, and ſaith; Therefore whereſoever any question or doubt ariſeth of Salvation, or our juſtifying before God, there the Law and All good Works must be utterly excluded and stand apart, that grace may appear free, the Promiſe ſimple, and that Faith may ſtand alone, which faith alone without Law or Works, worketh to every Man particularly his Salvation through meer promiſe and the free grace of God; this word particularly I add for the particular certifying of every Mans heart privately, and particularly that believeth in Chriſt, ſo Faith is the inſtrumental Cauſe by which every Man applyeth the Body of Chriſt, particularly to his own Salvation, ſo that in the action and office of Juſtification, both Law and Works (all good Works above) be here utterly ſecluded and exempted, as things having nothing to do in this behalf: The reaſon is this, for ſeeing that all our Redemption univerſally ſpringeth only from the body of the Son of God Crucified, then is there nothing that can ſtand us in stead, but that only wherewith this body of Christ is apprehended, now for ſo much as neither the Law nor Works, but Faith only is the thing that apprehendeth the Body and death of Chriſt, therefore Faith only is that matter which Juſtifieth every Soul before God, through the ſtrength of that Object, which it doth apprehend, for the Object only of our Faith is the body of Chriſt; like as the brazen Serpent was the other only of the Iſraelites looking by the ſtrength of which Object, through the promiſe of God immediately proceeded health to the Beholders, ſo the Body of Christ being the Object of our Faith, striketh righteouſneſs to our Souls. Thus far Mr. Frith.

Here's good, ſound, ſtrong, home-ſpun Divinity, that came from the heart of an early Engliſh Martyr in the days of Hen. VIII. It came not from Rome or Amſterdam, or Poland, and becauſe the Book of our bleſſed Martyrs is in few hands, I'll tranſcribe ſome more of Mr. Frith's contrariety to our new way of ſtating Goſpel Truth, hoping it may tend to the eſtabliſhing Souls, whom the Sophiſtry of ſome Men may amuſe with their Connexions of, &c. to Faith and Holineſs in the buſineſs of pardon of ſin, to which Mr. Frith ſaith, as follows, In a Chriſtian mans life there's the Law, there's Repentance, there is Hope, Charity, all which in mans Life and Doctrine are joyned, and yet in the action of juſtifying there is nothing elſe in man that hath any Part or Place but only Faith apprehending the Object, which is the body of Chriſt Jeſus for us Crucified, in whom conſiſteth all the worthineſs of our Salvation by Faith, that is, by our apprehending and receiving of him, according as it is written, John 1. Whoſoever received him, he gave them Power to be made the Sons of God even all ſuch as believed in his Name.

For ſo much therefore as the Truth of the Scripture in expreſs words hath included our Salvation in Faith only, we are enforced neceſſarily to Exclude all other cauſes and Means in our Juſtification, and to make this difference between the Law and Goſpel between Faith and Works, affirming with the Scripture and Word of God, that the Law condemneth us, our Works, (of all ſorts) do not avail us, and that Faith in Chriſt doth only juſtifie us, and this ought diligently to be learned of all Christians, eſpecially in all conflicts of Conſcience between the Law and the Goſpel, Faith and Works, Grace and Merits, Promiſe and Condition, Gods Free Election and Mans free Will, ſo that the light of the Free grace of God in our Salvation, may appear to all Conſciences to the Immortal glory of Gods holy Name, Amen.

Thus ſaid this bleſſed Servant of the Lord Jeſus, and this he ſealed with his Blood, and this was good Doctrine in thoſe days among the Reformed, this was thought worthy to be inſerted in our famous Book of Martyrs, and approved by the whole Body of Chriſtians in the Nation, and not ſcandalized as the ſame expreſſions are in Dr. Criſp's Sermons. I would fain know what more ſtabbing words can be ſaid againſt Mr. Williams Theſis or Poſition, than both Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Frith have inſiſted on, No manner of Works make us right wiſe, and no works make us unright-wiſe, and all good Works muſt be utterly excluded, and ſtand apart, that grace may appear free: Now are not Repentance, Holineſs, new Obedience, perſeverance, and Mr. Williams his &c. Good works, yet they muſt ſtand apart, and be far from ſuch a Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe in our ſalvation, as Perfect Obedience was to the Rule of the Precept. O, that God would teach Men to, lower their high towering Opinions of our Holineſs, concurring to our Salvation, and cry Grace, grace to all, from the Foundation to th • Top-ſtone, ſtill not of works (though this galls proud Fleſh) leſt any boaſt.

For a farther ſatisfaction in this great point, let us ſee what our great Men preſently after the down-fall of Popery in this Nation, have ſaid as to our works in the matter of Salvation. The Homiliſts ſay in fol. 27. All good Works ſpring from Faith, and cannot be done without Faith; then I argue if they ſpring from Faith, and that we are juſtifyed by Faith, then good works have no hand in our Juſtification, becauſe that is over, in order of nature, before a good work ſprung up, then what have we to do with Mr. Williams Goſpel Obedience conforming to the Promiſe in order to pardon? The Homiliſts ſay farther, from thoſe words, without me you can do nothing. That what work is done without Faith is ſin, and without Faith all done of us is dead, and Auſtin ſaith, fol. 31. Whether thou will or no, that work that comes not of Faith is naught: There is one work in which is all good Works, that's Faith, This is the Work of God to believe in him; ſo that Chriſt called Faith the work of God, and as ſoon as a man hath Faith, anon he ſhall flouriſh in good Works. Thus Holy Austin was for Faith alone, without the Trumpery of our Obedience with, &c. in order to pardon. Mr. W. fixeth Repentance and Faith with Holineſs, &c. to be the Terms of Pardon. How far this, &c, goes, it may be Mr. Williams may tell us in the next Edition, or by the Athenian Mercury, but for the conſolation of humble Enquirers into the truth, I'll tell them what our Homiliſts ſay of this great grace of Repentance which Mr. W. puts before Faith, and which he makes one of the terms of Pardon with his &c. in fol. 258. theſe Homiliſts ſay, We must return to the Lord, yea to him alone, and never reſt till we have taken bold upon him, but this muſt be done by Faith, and he himſelf in his Goſpel doth cry out, I am the way, the Truth and the Life, therefore they are greatly deceived, who preach, Repentance without Chriſt. (ſo that with the Homiliſts 'tis firſt Chriſts ours by Faith, then Repentance,) they that think they have done much of themſelves towards Repentance, are ſo much more the farther from God. This is not like our new Goſpel Truth ſtated, that a man without ſaving Faith in Jeſus, may repent of his ſins, yet ſay the Homiliſts, but 'tis ſuch a Repentance, as Judas's, ſuch as puts him farther from God, and in fol. 263. they confirm their Doctrine of no ſound Repentance without Faith in Jeſus, the way to it, and ſay, We muſt beware, we in no wiſe imagin we can repent aright hy our own strength, for this must be verifyed in all Men, without me, you can do nothing. Mr. W. will ſay he owns that Chriſt enables us to repent, 'tis true, but doth he own a Man is in Chriſt, believes in Chriſt, before he repent, if he do not own that, then he comes not up to the Text, where Chriſt ſpeaking of all his to the Branches, in him, he ſaith upon that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , without me, or out of me you can do nothing, you cannot repent or do new Obedience if not a branch in me by Faith.

Again, in fol. 268 they ſay, They that preach Repentance, without a lively Faith in our Saviour. Jeſus Chriſt, do teach Judas his Repentance: It is evident, tho' we be never ſo earneſtly Sorry for our ſins acknowledge and confeſs them, all theſe are but means to bring us to utter deſpair, except we do stedfastly believe that God our heavenly Father will for his Son Jeſus Chriſt's ſake pardon and forgive us our Offences. To them I add the Teſtimony of as great a Scholar, and as ſound a Proteſtant as Mr. Williams who above 100 years ago gave a better account of Faith and Holineſs than Mr. W. doth, and that is Mr. Perkins, no Antinomian who ſaith in fol. 236. The law promiſes life to him that performs Obedience perfect, The Goſpel promiſes Salvation to him that doth nothing in the cauſe of his Salvation, but only Believes in Chriſt; yet not for this Faith, or for any work elſe, but for the merit of Chriſt. this is a big word; what, do nothing in the cauſe of Salvation but believe? no, nothing, ſaith Mr. Perkins, and before Mr. Williams can confute him, he muſt prove Chriſts Righteouſneſs ours by Faith, is meant of our Goſpel Holineſs; that is, God ſaith 'tis Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, but he means quite otherwiſe, viz. 'tis our Goſpel Holineſs. Mr. Perkins is in good earneſt that we are to do nothing for Salvation but believe and anſwer ſeveral Objections as follow.

Objection 4th. (ſaith Mr. Perkins) To believe is a work, therefore one work is commanded in the Goſpel, and is neceſſary to Salvation. Anſwer. The Goſpel conſiders not Faith as a Vertue or Work, but as a Hand to apprehend Christ, for Faith doth not Cauſe or effect or procure our Juſtification and Salvation but as the Beggars Hand receives them, being wholly wrought and given of God, and in fol. 247 he ſaith, we must first be Juſtified before we can do a good work, and in fol. 287. Paul teaches that works ſet up as Cauſes of Salvation with Chriſt make void the grace of God: And is not this making them cauſes of Salvation with Chriſt, to ſay Chriſt purchaſed this Grace, that our Sincere Obedience, Faith, Holineſs, Perſeverance, ſhould be accepted to anſwer the rule of the Goſpel Promiſe for pardon.

Well doth Mr. Perkins proceed to reject our Righteouſneſs in the matter of Salvation, and Saith in fol. 955 of vol. 1ſt. A mans Conſcience must in ſome ſort be ſettled touching his reconciliation with God, before he can begin to Repent, wherefore Juſtification and Sanctification in order of Nature, go before Repentance, but if we reſpect time, (then) Grace and Repentance are together.

This is intelligible Doctrine, and ſtrenuous for the advancement of Chriſt alone and the ſame in effect as Mr. Perkins had aſſerted, contrary to Mr. Williams in fol. 84. Saying, From Sanctification Repentance is derived, becauſe no man can earneſtly repent except he denying himſelf, do hate ſin, and embrace Righteouſneſs, this no man can perform; but ſuch an one as is in the ſight of God regenerate and Juſtified and indued with true Faith, and regarding the Order of Nature it follows Faith and Juſtification. O theſe are ſtrong battering Rams againſt ſetting up mans Righteouſneſs, and in fol. 468. he gives account, whence this new Doctrine of repentance having a hand in our Salvation, comes, viz. from Rome, and ſaith thus — The Church of Rome hath Corrupted the Antient Doctrine of Repentance (ſaying) That a Sinner hath in him a Natural diſpoſition which being stir'd up by God's preventing Grace, he may, and can work together with Gods Spirit in his own Repentance: But indeed all our Repentance is to be aſcribed to Gods grace wholly, Eph. 2.4. The Soul of man is not weak but ſtark dead in ſin, and therefore it can no more prepare it ſelf to repentance than the body being dead in the Grave can diſpoſe it ſelf to the laſt Reſurrection.

O theſe are weighty words, and O that they might prevail in the hand of the Spirit of God to weaken mans apprehenſions of ſomething practicable in and by himſelf in order to bring about his Salvation, that ſo we might all put our Mouths in the duſt, and give glory to God, for of him and through him, (eſpecially in the matter of our Salvation) and to him be all things to whom be glory in the Churches for ever; thus much for Mr. W. Sanction of the Goſpel, giving pardon on our Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe.

In the next place Mr. W. aſſerts a profound benefit by Goſpel grace, and yet it carries Poyſon in it I fear, Hence by Goſpel grace there is a great difference between imperfect Faith and utter Ʋnbelief. The Poyſon in the head of this Snake, I fear is, that this imperfect Faith is intended to be the upſhot of Goſpel Grace.

A little to deſcant upon this, I would offer; That if ſo mean a Lover of the Lord Jeſus as I am, ſhould have been telling the World the benefit of Goſpel Grace, I ſhould have flown a little higher in celebrating the Love of God therein, than to ſay by it, imperfect Faith differs greatly from utter Ʋnbelief; which without Goſpel Grace any Child of four Years Old, will grant, That can tell there is a great difference between a little meſs of Milk and none at all. I ſhould have ſaid, By Goſpel Grace there is a great difference between our Lord Jeſus freely given us, and with him all things, even himſelf, to be our Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, &c. And being ſlaves of Satan, ſold under ſin, without this goſpel grace, I ſhould have invited the World to rejoyce in this Benefit by Goſpel Grace, That Chriſt was made ſin for us, that he might be made righteouſneſs to us, or become the Lord our Righteouſneſs: And that by Goſpel Grace, God com • s to juſtify the Ungodly, to ſave Sinners, of whom the Apoſtle ſaith, He was chief, and a Pattern of them who ſhould afterward believe to everlaſting life; this is right goſpel grace, worthy of the Father, Son, and Spirit, to give, Purchaſe, and Communicate. I ſhould ſcarce have flamm'd the World off with ſuch a dead Carcaſs of Divinity, as to ſay, If you look for the glorious Priviledge and Benefit of Goſpel Grace, which the Father, Son, and Spirit, have been contriving, and rejoycing in from all Eternity, and which the Eternal Bleſſed Son of God, took Man's Nature for, and for which he was under the Curſe of God, and died, for which all the Angels and Saints of God for ever adore him: It was, that this ſhould be publiſhed. That there is by the Goſpel Grace a great difference between imperfect Faith and utter Unbelief, or which is much at one, between an Eſſentiality and a Nullity, between ſomething and nothing; there is ſo great difference as is between Heaven and Hell; and this difference is eternal, and ſo would have been without any thing of the Goſpel. I ſuppoſe Mr. W. means, though he is unhappy in not expreſſing it, that by Goſpel Grace, imperfect Faith is accepted for perfect Obedience, that is to ſay, if it be joyned with ſincere Holineſs, true Repentance, and Perſeverance, &c. but this is ſtill wide from the mark of Goſpel Grace; for the Apoſtle ſaith, It brings Salvation, and teaches Godlineſs.

But Mr. W. will make the World amends, it may be hoped, in the next Benefit by Goſpel Grace, which take as follows: By goſpel grace there is a great difference between ſincere Holineſs and formal Profaneneſs or Wickedneſs; one would wonder how goſpel grace comes to be hookt into this Difference, which all the World would own to be infinitely different without any grace of God in the Goſpel. Did our Lord Jeſus ſhed his Blood for this Notion to be aſſerted? which was as true without any grace of the goſpel, as with it; but it may be he means that by goſpel grace there is a Purchaſe made, that ſincere Holineſs ſhall ſtand inſtead of perfect Holineſs, which Wickedneſs could not do: And this he muſt mean or nothing, and if he means this, he perfectly overthrows the goſpel, and if he do not mean it, he abuſes the World with an Amuſement. The next is, True Love to God and prevailing Enmity. There is by Goſpel Grace (he ſaith) great difference between theſe. But this is another great miſtake, which I am confident he will he aſhamed to own: What hath the goſpel to do to make this great difference? By the law is the Knowledge of ſin, and the goſpel ſhews grace; but to ſay the goſpel makes this difference, is to roh God of the Holineſs of his righteous Law. But ſuppoſing this Nonſenſe to be current Divinity with ſome, that by goſpel Grace there is great difference between God and the Devil, or Love to God, and prevailing Enmity: What is this to the point Mr. Williams is labouring to make good, that there is to be a Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe in the perſon to be pardoned; for proof of which, he ſaith, There is great difference between Love of God and prevailing Enmity. Would he have his meaning to be, that love of God is conforming to the Rule of the Promiſe, therefore an ingredient to Pardon, which Enmity is not. I anſwer, Love of God is as much conforming to the Rule of the Law as of Goſpel grace; and ſo his Argument faces; had he ſaid, the Law commands us to love God, and the Goſpel promiſeth to write this Law in our hearts, though not as an ingredient to our Pardon, there might be ſome Edification by it; but to aſſert, there is a difference between theſe two, which was ever ſo, is of no more force for his Argument, than to ſay, Black and White differ, or I and Doctor C. d • ffer. His next is like the three former Differences, viz. by Goſpel grace there is a great difference between in perfect ſpiritual Duties and Rebellious Negle • ts. Now he hath ſpun a fine Thread; heres the end of his Goſpel grace; it hath made this difference; and would not this difference have been, if we had never heard of the Goſpel? What Riches of grace is this in Mr. Williams's goſpel! the ſum whereof is, It hath made a difference between Faith and Unbelief, Holineſs and Profaneneſs, Love and Enmity, Duty and Rebellion. O what Encomiums muſt the World raiſe to ſuch a Diſcoverer of that which Nature, without either Law or Goſpel, teaches every man! But ſome hidden Treaſure muſt lye under this Rubbiſh of Divinity; 'tis not for nothing, that Goſpel grace is dignified with procuring theſe four Bleſſings: therefore Mr. W. muſt mean that Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe, is in our imperfect Faith, ſincere Holineſs, love of God and ſpiritual Duties; and theſe are the Conditions on which the goſpel promiſeth pardon; now how correſpondent Mr. Williams goſpel is to the Prophet Iſaiah's Account, the world may judge from Iſaiah 43.25. I even I am he that blotteth out thy Tranſgreſſions, for mine own ſake. This is the Rule for Pardon, in the ſenſe of Doctor Criſp, and of all that love the Lord Jeſus, for obtaining this goſpel grace, and for thoſe that differ, I beſeech the Lord to open their Eyes, and ſubdue their Hearts to the ſimplicity of the goſpel, that they may lay down their ſtrong Reaſonings, which indeed are fooliſhneſs not only with God, but to every Child of ſeven Years old, that hath learnt his Aſſemblies Catechiſm. But now I think on't, Mr. Williams hath ſlur'd that by his new unſound one; come we next to his Concluſion of his great point of our Conformity to the Rule, in order to obtain pardon, wherein he ſaith thus, God in diſpenſing of goſpel promiſed Bleſſings, doth judicially determine a conformity to THIS Rule of the Promiſe. We muſt obſerve that deciſive word this Rule, no goſpel Bleſſing, without a Conformity to this Rule, that is, the four Pillars of his Babel; to build Pardon upon, our imperfect Faith, our ſincere Holineſs, our love of God, our ſpiritual Duties, which include every Precept, Counſel, and Direction in the Bible; as much as to ſay, Stand by, bleſſed Jeſus, I have heard of thy pretious Blood, a Ranſom; I have heard of thy ſaving to the uttermoſt all that come to God by thee; I have heard of thy paſſing by, when poor Sinners lay in their Blood dead in Sins, and ſaying, Live; I have heard, thou didſt ſay, Publicans and Harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you Phariſees, that juſtify your ſelves, M •• h. 21.3 • . But there is riſen up in this laſt Age, a Generation of ſtrong Reaſoners, that ſay, Our formal Pardon is not in thy Blood, but we muſt get it, as it were by the VVorks of the Law, by Faith, Holineſs, Perſeverance, Love, Spiritual Duties; and this Doctrine, O Jeſus, I muſt adhere to, or I ſhall be accounted a Dethroner of thee, and an enervater of thy Laws, though there is not one word either in the Law or Goſpel, that enjoyns theſe as Conditions to obtain Pardon. But thy Righteouſneſs is by them interpreted to be our goſpel Holineſs; and upon this they ground our obtaining Pardon, not by the one work of the Law, Thou ſhalt love the Lord with all thine heart, but by the many works of the goſpel. O that ever mens Learning and Parts, ſhould be ſo vitiated as to decry the ſimplicity of the Truth, as it is in Jeſus! Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved; ſet up their Scheme of a goſpel Promiſe of Pardon, upon a Conformity to this preſcribed Rule of Duties innumerable, beſides Repentance, Faith, Love, ſincere Holineſs, Perſeverance, Obedience; and when all this is mentioned, there comes in a boundleſs, &c. O to the Law, and to the Teſtimonies, let tis ſay, which directs us plainly, Look to me, and be ye ſaved, all the ends of the Earth, come unto me, and ye ſhalt find rest for your Souls.

After all this Pudder Mr. Williams comes to himſelf, and alſo Doctor Criſp, and though he had been ſetting up his Connexions and Conformity in Faith, Holineſs, Obedience, &c. At laſt he comes to Bellarmins's Tutiſſimum, to the Sheet Anchor, To the alone true Goſpel way of Salvation, true uniting Faith in Chriſt. I was in an Amazement to find, that God extorted this Confeſſion from him after his long Deviation, That true uniting Faith was the Wedding Garment. This is like a Miniſter of the goſpel of our Lord Jeſus, if he can ſtay here; but alas! the next Page throws this good Miſt down; however, we will make much of this; for here he Centers with the choiceſt Chriſtians, when he ſaith thus, God upon a View of his guests, he caſt out him that had not on the Wedding Garment, viz. true uniting Faith. Then I, quaere, What's become of the Long Bed-Roll of Spiritual Duties, Faith, Love, Repentance, Holineſs, Obedience, &c. If true uniting Faith be the Wedding garment, ſure this Wedding garment was not worn without Pardon of Sins, through the Blood of Chriſt, waſhing them off from this gueſt; if this were by true uniting Faith, and nothing elſe, was lookt after by the Maſter of the Feaſt, but that his Gueſts owned him by wearing him their Righteouſneſs by Faith; then avoid the Scheme of our holy Performances from having any thing to do in our being admitted to fit with the King at his round Table.

But what ſhall we ſay, unſtable as water Reuben was; no ſooner hath Mr. Williams writ clear goſpel, that nothing but true uniting Faith kept a Man from being caſt out; but the next Clauſe brings in perſevering Holineſs, with the Train of all ſpiritual Duties, to give admittance to the wiſe Virgins; ſo that one while we are juſtified by Faith, another while by perſevering Holineſs. If you are to go to the Wedding Feaſt, you are to put on true uniting Faith: If you are to enter with the Bridegroom to the Marriage, then 'tis the Spirit of grace, and perſevering Holineſs gains you admittance; theſe are his words, As by keeping out the fooliſh Virgins, for not having Oyl in their Lamps, viz. the Spirit of grace, and perſevering Holineſs; ſo by admitting the wiſe Virgins, he judicially declared, they had a Spirit of grace and perſevering Holineſs. Here's not one word of Faith, or of Chriſt, or of his Righteouſneſs; for theſe poor Virgins to get into the Wedding Houſe by; not one ſyllable of being juſtified by Faith: But according to his ſenſe, they ſaid to Chriſt, Lord, we have the Spirit of grace, and perſevering Holineſs; we have propheſied in thy Name against too much exalting Free Grace; we have done many wonderful Works; we have perſevered in our Holineſs till thy coming. But will Chriſt give them admiſſion on this Plea of a Spirit of grace, and holineſs, without a word of Faith in our Lord Jeſus? No ſure, he will ſay, I know you not, you would not know me to be your Righteouſneſs: You come in your goſpel Holineſs; I know you not.

This is to make the goſpel yea and nay. 'Tis yea to day, true uniting Faith gains admittance to day, 'tis nay to morrow; now perſevering Holineſs doth it. This is giving an uncertain Sound; whereas the Promiſes are the ſame to day, yeſterday, and for ever, and all, yea, and Amen, in Chriſt Jeſus; If true Faith be the Wedding Garment, our wearing Chriſts Righteouſneſs, the ſame true Faith is that which receives the Oyl into our Veſſels, the blood or righteouſneſs of Jeſus, ours by Faith, or the Spirit of Life, which is in Chriſt Jeſus, Rom 8.2. This Chriſt dwelling in our Hearts by Faith, Chriſt dwelling in us by the holy Spirit, is the true Oyl that the Wiſe Virgins gain admittance by.

His next Clauſe is, the advancing into our Juſtification God's terms of forgiving, adopting, glorifying as Rector, by believing, &c. This, &c. hath a great hand in forgiving, I ſuppoſe it wonderful to every Judicious R • ader, that a Gentleman of great Parts and ſenſe ſhould blend the Goſpel thus, as to make the Goſpel Bleſſings to be diſperſt by God, with regard to our being Believers, &c. that is, to our being Believers, and performing all the Duties preſcribed in the Goſpel; he puts it only God hath a regard to it, but the plain Engliſh muſt be, God doth ſo regard our performing this Act of believing, &c. and that till death, and not only ſo, but all other Goſpel Duties, that if we do not perform them, God diſpenſes no goſpel Bleſſing, ſo that we are ſtill under a Covenant of Works, but let us ſee the true lineaments of this new Goſpel, which is in theſe words of Mr. Williams. Thus, Can any think that Forgiving, Adopting, Glorifying, or the conveyance of every other promiſed Benefit, given on Gods terms are not Judicial acts of God as Rector; if ſo, doth he diſpenſe theſe blindly and promiſcuouſly, without any regard to our being Believers, &c. or no? I ſuppoſe Mr. W. will be accounted more hold than becomes him, to inſinuate that God diſpenſes his Bleſſings blindly, if he do not beſtow them in his way, upon his terms of our being Believers, &c. O that men were humble, and in pretending to oppoſe Dr. Criſp they did not ſpeak indecently of God, by calling him a blind giver of Benefits, if he give them not according to our preſcriptions of his rectoral Government: God gives freely, God gives before we have done good or Evil; God ſhews mercy, becauſe he will ſhew mercy; God ſaves the chief of ſinners in the Career of ſin; God therefore ſpeaks comfortably, becauſe Iſrael went after her Lovers, and pardons ſin becauſe it is great; his ways in ſhewing mercy, are paſt finding out, juſtifying the Ungodly, and not calling the Righteous; and yet God diſpenſes not blindly and promiſcuouſly, though he do not do it in Mr. W. way of having ſome regard to our being Believers, Repenters, Perſeverers, &c. Vain man would be wiſer than God, when God ſaith, Not for your ſakes do I this, be it known unto you, but for mine holy Names ſake, which ye have prophaned among the Heathen. Will Mr. W. be ſo bold as to think God diſpenſes his Bleſſings blindly, becauſe he doth not give them on thoſe terms he hath preſcribed; We ſee Gods terms, here are for his Names ſake which they prophaned; prophaning Gods Name was all that God had regard to on their part, it was his own holy name was his only inducement, his holy, free, gratious Covenant in which his holy name was engaged, not our being believers, Perſeverers in ſpiritual Duties, &c.

The like ground God looks at and regards in his delivering Iſrael in Deut. 7.7. not their being more excellent than other People, but his own love of them, The Lord did not ſet his love upon you, and ch • ſe you, becauſe you were more than other people, for you were the feweſt of all People, but becauſe the Lord loved you, theſe are Gods Terms, he loved and choſe becauſe he loved: Sure Mr. Williams will not ſay God had regard to their holineſs in diſpenſing his bl • ſſings to them, before the goſpel ſhined in its luſtre through our Lord Jeſus, and muſt God be charged with blind promiſcuous diſpenſing bleſſings now under clear goſpel light, if he now ſhew mercy in a ſoveraign way of grace to groſs ſinners, without regard to any good they do, while he ſuffer the Righteous in their own Eyes to periſh in their own righteouſneſs. O let us not preſcribe rules and terms to God for his beſtowing mercy, but thankfully accept his grace and mercy in our Lord Jeſus, freely given, becauſe he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens. Well, but Mr. W. will confirm his Poſition, and that by Scripture too, though ſtrained thus, With reſpect to what's above declared, the goſpel is called a Law of Faith, a law of liberty: It is true, the goſpel is called in oppoſition to the Law of works, a Law of Faith, but I think in the ſtream of the whole Bible, David could not find a fitter ſtone to ſling into the Head of this great Goliath, mans righteouſneſs to joyn with Chriſts than this Scripture; Mr. Williams is ſetting up a righteouſneſs of Works or goſpel Holineſs, for uſhering in pardon, and to prove it, ſaith the goſpel is called a Law of Faith, but let us ſee how 'tis ſo called in Rom. 3.26, 27. To declare his righteouſneſs that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jeſus, where is boasting then? it is excluded, by what Law, of Works? Nay, but by the law of Faith. Here the Apoſtle ſetly and ſolemnly treats of excluding works, and of our being juſtified by Faith without works of all ſorts, and poſitively aſſerts, God is juſt in juſtifying the Believer; God could not be juſt in juſtifying according to the Arminian way, for our imperfect holineſs, or having any regard to it in the matter of Juſtifying, but God is just in juſtifying a Believer, becauſe the Believer hath a perfect compleat righteouſneſs of Chriſt put upon him to anſwer the Law by, and God looking upon him compleat in Chriſt, is just in Juſtifying him. The Apoſtle having laid this ground work to damn all ſelf-righteouſneſs or works, even Faith as a work in the matter of Juſtification; he comes and makes a challenge directly againſt Mr. Williams's Doctrine, of our ſincere holineſs concurring to pardon, and ſaith where is boaſting then? Where are all theſe great Advancers of mans righteouſneſs, which tends to boaſting? and he gives the ſtabbing anſwer, It is excluded: God hath not leſt the leaſt Crevice for it to enter by, 'tis wholly excluded, 'tis ſhut out from ever having any thing to do in our ſalvation; yet may one ſay, 'tis ſhut out by the Law of Works, the old Moral Law, do and live; we grant that, but there is a goſpel holineſs will let in boaſting again; I muſt repent, believe, be ſincerely holy, and perſevere therein all my days, and God hath regard to this in my Juſtification: no, no, 'tis wholly ſhut out, there is to be no boaſting, and 'tis ſhut out by the law of Faith, by that Faith I juſt now mentioned; all you have to do in the point of Juſtification is, Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and you ſhall be ſaved. Do theſe Men ſeek a Law? here's the Law, this is his Commandment, that you believe in the name of the Lord Jeſus, John 3.23. when they ſaid, What ſhall we do that we might work the works of God, Jeſus anſwered and ſaid unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe in him whom he hath ſent, ſo the Apoſtle here, do you ſeek, a Law that excludes from boaſting, I'll tell. you the Law, 'tis the law of Faith to believe on him that is juſt, and the juſtifier of the Ungodly upon his believing, and yet this Mr. W. brings for confirmation of his ſincere holineſs, that God regards in his giving pardon. But thus it pleaſeth God to confound the wiſe by quoting a Text in order to adulterate it, when in the Iſſue, no Text is more ſharp upon him.

A farther Confirmation of his ſetting up works for concurring to pardon, is in the next words thus. And it (the goſpel) ſpecially inſists on that ſincerity of grace and holineſs, which the rule of the Promiſe makes neceſſary in its deſcription of the Perſon, whom it makes partaker of its included Benefit; ſure never was the free grace and love of God to Man ſo fetter'd and obſcured, by dark expreſſions; had any Sophiſter induſtriouſly ſet himſelf to vitiate the true meaning of Gods Love in theſe words, God ſo loved the World, that he gave his only beloved Son, that whoſoever believeth in him, ſhould not periſh, but have everlaſting life; he could not poſſibly, I think have done it worſe, than to explain hem in Mr. W. expreſſions, of the goſpel inſiſting on grace, and that ſincere, and on holineſs; and that ſuch as the rule of the Promiſe makes neceſſary, and that rule of the Promiſe is in its deſcription of the Perſon to be benefited by it, which deſcription muſt needs be the whole word of God, and when this perſon hath all that holineſs that we find the word of God recommends, then this perſon by this rule with this holineſs, is partaker of an included benefit. God of his rich mercy pour out his Spirit and grant his Servants may be inabled to deliver his clear plain Scripture offers of life and Salvation by Jeſus Chriſt, with clearer Evidence than this, Is this the way of confuting Dr. C. who aſſerts Goſpel Grace in plain Goſpel Terms; That Chriſt came to ſeek and ſave the loſt, that he ſeeks and finds his loſt ſheep, and brings them home upon his Shoulders, that he carries the Lambs in his Arms, and gently leads thoſe with young, and inſtead of ſuch Soul-ſaving encouragements, to poor ſinners, to put them off with our grace and holineſs, and not a word of Gods ſaving them in Chriſt, but our coming up to the rule which the promiſe makes neceſſary? And who ſhall be able to ſay, when he hath done all, that he comes up to Mr. Williams rule of believing, &c. his Obedience, &c. his perſevering, &c. from ſuch ſtating of Goſpel Truth, O Lord deliver thy People.

Now we come to the Uſe Mr. Williams makes of his premiſes of ſalvation, from our conformity to Goſpel rule of new obedience, &c. which he ſumms up in few words, viz. And the main of our Miniſtry conſiſts in preſſing men to Anſwer the Rule of the Goſpel Promiſe. But the main of the Apoſtles was, to know nothing but Chriſt and him crucified, and to preſs men to be found in him, and ſo Mr. W. once did when he preach'd that Christ indured the utmoſt, God bated him nothing, the atonement was ſo compleat that God can demand no other from Christ, or from any Soul this Atonement is applyed to. This he deduced from this Doctrine, The reconciling of ſinners to God is effected by the concurring influence of the Prieſtly and Kingly Office of Chriſt. Well then, Chriſt hath effected this reconciliation; what remains for poor man to do, but accept it and be thankful, not to come in with his Goſpel Holineſs, for God to have regard to in our reconciliation to God. But it ſeems this ſtream of Goſpel grace muſt not run ſo clear, now in his Book; here muſt be conformity to Goſpel Rule, before we have any benefit by Chriſt, which conſiſts in Repentance, Faith, &c. to all the reſt, and now this is preſt, and the main of our Miniſtry conſiſts in this, whereas the main of the Apoſtles, was to beſeech Men to be reconciled to God, becauſe God was in Chriſt, and when upon the Croſs, reconciling the world to himſelf, when by one Offering he for ever perfected the Work, and cryed out, it is finiſhed; and then after Union, after engrafting into Chriſt; after being in a bleſſed ſtate of Salvation, ſecured ſo as never to fall away, then the Apoſtle preſſes to walk worthy of this Goſpel, of this free Salvation by Jeſus Chriſt.

Mr. Williams proceeds, viz. We call men to be reconciled to God, upon which we know God will be at peace with them. This I thought it would come to at laſt, Firſt, we muſt come to God and be reconciled to him, and then God will be at peace with us, which is juſt contrary to the Apoſtle, when we were Enemies, we were reconciled, Rom. 5.10. But when Men will be pampering with our holineſs, for God to look to in our acceptance in Chriſt, they will fall into a Covenant of Works, and call it Goſpel Grace, that our works are accepted, in order to our Juſtification and Salvation; we muſt firſt be reconciled to God, ſaith Mr. W. that is, we muſt firſt comply with the goſpel rule, of not only Faith, but Holineſs, Repentance, and perſeverance in new Obedience, and having thus brought our ſelves to that reconciled poſture, then God will be at peace; is this fulfilling Chriſts commiſſion, Go Preach the goſpel to every Creature, he that believeth ſhall be ſaved? Is this proclaiming the acceptable year of the Lord, When thou wast in thy Blood, I ſaid to thee, Live, and for mine own Name ſake, I will remember their ſins no more? God waits to be gracious, knocking at the Door of poor ſinners hearts, crying, Open to me, let me come in, I bring my Supper, I bring my Son, only let him in, only receive him by Faith, God don't ſay, my Son and I will be at peace with you after you have waſht you and made your ſelves clean; but he comes to tell you he loved you and waſht you from your ſins in his blood on the Croſs, and you that believe in me are the Perſons: I was reconciled to you then, and am come now to offer it to you, and beſeech you to be reconciled to me: Thus with theſe words of his firſt love, he draws poor ſinners to be reconciled to him, and do not damp their Comforts by telling them, I will be at peace, if you be reconciled to me, but revives their hearts by telling them that the peace is already wrought in God and for ſinners, by Chriſt at his death, for that he made peace by the Blood of his Croſs and by him reconciled all to himſelf, Col. 1.20. Chriſt did not ſtay till we were reconciled to him, as Mr. W. ſeems to intimate, when he calls men to be reconciled to God, upon which he knows, God will be at peace with them. This I take to be ſetting the Cart before the Horſe, to invite Men to be reconciled thereby, to get God to be at peace, whereas the ſweet heavenly ſtrain of the goſpel is, Come, for all things are ready, come to Jeſus who is already made of God, to you that come, Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, Sanctification and Redemption, who is the Author and finiſher of your Faith. O Jeſus, thus draw and we will run after thee, and thus he hath drawn thouſands by the Prophets, and Apoſtles preaching, and his faithful Servants after him, to come to God, and to holy Obedience in Love, whereas the legal drawing, of walking holily, and then God will be at peace, keeps poor Souls in perpetual doubts, and works the Soul but to a Spirit of Bondage.

Next comes the Top-ſtone of this New ſyſtem of goſpel Truth, which looks as if it were hewed and ſquared at Rome, with only a little Varniſh at Amſterdam, viz. Theſe things (Gods promiſing life by forgiveneſs, and yee inſiſting on ſome Degree of Obedience) will help thy Conceptions, ſtill remembring that the merit of Chriſt are the cauſe of this goſpel Ordination. Can any ſpiritual inlightned mind read this, and not bluſh for Mr. W. and think he is hard put to it to ſupport his cauſe, of laying our ſalvation on our goſpel holineſs joyned with Chriſts righteouſneſs, when he flies to ſuch an Aſſertion as the Papiſts have been forced to forſake, being beaten out of that Trench by our great Divines: That Chriſt merited, that we ſhould merit, this they aſſerted, but found it would not hold water, therefore Bellarmin flies to his Tutiſſimum, and ſaith in his Book de Juſtif. l. 5. ch. 7. pro. 3. Propter incertitudinem propriae Juſtitiae & periculum inanis gloriae, Tutiſſimum est totam fiduciam in ſola Dei miſericordia & benignitate reponere. Becauſe of the uncertainty of our own righteouſneſs, and the danger of vain glory, it is ſafeſt to put all our truſt in the alone mercy and bounty of God. Here the Jeſuit flies from the goſpel Ordination that Chriſt merited, that God ſhould have regard to our goſpel holineſs, and our conformity to goſpel Rule, for obtaining goſpel promiſe; this chimed well with him in his long arguments for Juſtification by works, but upon his review of his ſtrong reaſons, he flies from it and betakes himſelf to Gods meer mercy and bounty, which muſt be in Chriſt, and ſo I hope the great oppoſer of Dr. Criſp will do.

But in regard this is ſo broad and wide a gap, to let in the whole body of ſelf Juſticiaries, with their good works to come in for ſharing with Chriſt in ſalvation: I muſt make ſome oppoſition to it, both from Scripture and ſound Proteſtants. The merits of Christ, ſaith Mr. W. are the cauſe of this Ordination, that is, that our anſwering the goſpel rule obtains us intereſt in the goſpel Promiſe, or which is all one, Do and live; Chriſt merited that if we do we ſhall live, the only difference is the firſt doing and live, was perfect Obedience to the Law, and this doing and live of Mr. VV. is ſincere obedience to the goſpel in all its commands, counſels, &c. which every true Chriſtian trembles to think on.

Is this the upſhot of Chriſts Death, to merit, that our Goſpel Obedience ſhould be the ground of our obtaining Benefit by Chriſt; then I ſay again, it muſt come to this, that Chriſt merited that we ſhould merit; for there can be no benefit to a Sinner, but by merit; Chriſt did not abſolutely merit the Benefit for us, ſay they, but merited that we doing ſo, and ſo, ſhould obtain the Benefit; then our, doing ſo and ſo, muſt merit it; for it is injuſtice of God to himſelf, and his Righteous broken Law, to give a Sinner that deſerves Hell any good, unleſs that good be merited: and this is left to the Sinner, to obtain by Goſpel Obedience, which therefore, muſt of neceſſity be from merit. So that here it muſt reſt, or we make God unjuſt to himſelf, and ſo ſay, Chriſt purchas'd this, that we ſhould do ſo, is Nonſenſe. Mr. Williams can hardly aſſoyle himſelf from this Charge, till he retract this Aſſertion, That the merits of Chriſt are the cauſe of that Goſpel Ordination he had laid down. As for the Scriptures that oppoſe this Divinity, thoſe already mentioned are abundantly more than ſufficient to throw down the Houſe built on this Sandy Foundation, as that God ſo loved the World, that whoſoever believes in him, ſhould not periſh, but have everlaſting life. Here is nothing required, but believing to everlaſting life. So the Apoſtle, Acts 16. Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved. Here's complying with no other Goſpel Rule for Salvation, but believing in the Lord Jeſus: To which I may add, the whole Stream of the New Teſtament, to come and take the Water of Life freely, Rev. 22. They that hunger and thirſt after this Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, they ſhall be filled. If God by his grace have begot a true hunger, a true deſire after it, they ſhall have it, Come to me, if weary, if laden; caſt your ſelf on me, and you ſhall find reſt for your Souls: But the great Scripture is, Not to him that worketh, not to him that thinks to obtain goſpel Benefits, by complying with goſpel Rule of walking in holy Obedience, to obtain pardon by it, but to him that believes on him that juſtifies the Ʋngodly. This Scripture is enough to confound the whole Scheme of the new faſhion'd ſtating of goſpel Truth: The Apoſtle ſtates goſpel Truth thus, Not to him that worketh; no Works at all muſt come in in the buſineſs of our Salvation, as concurring to it: Thus the Apoſtle held, ſaith Mr. Williams, This lets in Licentiouſneſs; I have found a better way of ſtaring goſpel Truth, that is, To him that worketh, to him that complies with goſpel Rule, to him that is godly, not his Faith alone, but his Faith with ſincere Obedience: That is his goſpel Holineſs, which the Apoſtle intends, when he ſpeaks of being found in the Righteouſneſs of God by Faith: this gives right to goſpel Benefits. O what heart touched with love to the Lord Jeſus, and poor Souls, but muſt ake to ſee the goſpel thus mangled, and the Crown upon our goſpel Obedience, jointly with Chriſt! If this be not Evacuating, and Invalidating the compleat Mediation and Atonement of the Lord Jeſus, then what can do it? For he will not have any Co-workers with him for Juſtification and Salvation: Though by his Spirit he makes all his Regenerate ones Co-workers with him in the carrying on the Work of Sanctification.

Not to multiply Scriptures in a matter ſo ſtrenuouſly contended againſt by the Apoſtle, of our Works, concurring to our Salvation. I ſhall only add at preſent, that great Text, 2 Tim. 1.9. who hath ſaved us, and called us, not according to our Works: Here's a perfect Renunciation of VVorks, even VVorks of all ſorts, before Faith and after Faith: He don't ſay, VVho ſaved us not for our VVorks, but not according to our VVorks; our VVorks have no accordingneſs in them to our Salvation; they have no concurrence in that point; they are left quite out: Here's no room for Goſpel Obedience in complying with Goſpel Rule to obtain life: No, not a word of that; 'tis ſo far from being for our Works, that 'tis not according to our works, God hath no regard to them in ſaving and calling. He hath ſaved: How? He ſaved by calling us: How is that? Did he not call us to Salvation, upon ſeeing us comply with the Goſpel Rule? No, he ſaved us, and called us, not according to our Works. How then? Then, it is in a way that amazes the Scholaſtick World, a way that will not go down with the wiſe and prudent of this world. It is according to his grace (not our grace) according (I ſay) to his own grace given us in Christ, before the world began. O be amazed and confounded all that would ſtate Goſpel Truth any other way than God hath ſtated it, for the everlaſting comfort of all thoſe bleſſed ones whom God hath ſhewed their Election to, by their effectual Call to come to Chriſt; he hath ſaved, 'tis already done, and that not according to humane ſtating Goſpel Truth, not according to our Works, that way would leave us always under Suſpitions and Jealouſies to our dying day; but according to his ancient everlaſting Love, and that given to us as lookt upon in Chriſt, when choſen in him before they had done good or evil, before the world began, that the purpoſe of God according to Election, might ſtand: Here the Apoſtle leaves it, and ſo will I, as to Scripture Confutation of his Goſpel Ordination; and becauſe Mr. Williams may not ſay, This is but one Doctors Opinion, when he ſaith Doctor Criſp Dethrones Chriſt, by rejecting holy Works from concurring to Salvation, I ſhall ſpend ſome pains and time, begging it may be acceptable Service in the Lord, in ſhewing what ſeveral Servants of God of good Name, ſay to this point: I begin with Mr. Veale, a Gentleman not in the leaſt inclining to Antinomians, in his Sermon againſt Merits, Morn. Lect. fol. 437. He ſhuts out gratious Works from having any hand or concurrence in our Salvation, by this expreſſion, viz. It is muche that he (God) doth not damn you for your good Works, ſeeing they are all defiled, and have ſomething of Sin cleaving to them. What becomes of our Goſpel Holineſs now, and ſincere Obedience, in the caſe of Salvation? What, all good works ſin! then they are dung. Well, but hath not Chriſt merited ſuch a Goſpel Ordination, as our anſwering the Goſpel Rule of holy Obedience, though imperfect, it ſhall intereſt us in Goſpel Bleſſings. To this Mr. Veale ſaith, in fol. 417. It is in vain to ſay, that Chriſt hath merited for the Saints a power of meriting; The Papists can never prove that Chriſt merited any ſuch Power for Believers. It is really more for his honour to purchaſe all for them himſelf; but Mr. Williams will ſay, I do not ſay Chriſt merited, that we ſhould merit; no, but he ſaith, Chriſt merited God ſhould regard our works in Juſtification and in our Salvation: What's that, but coming in as it were by Works, not with a down-right rejecting of Chriſt, but with a ſide-wind bringing in our works. Chriſt merited that we ſhould do ſomething in our ſalvation: And what's that? In plain Engliſh, they give us a right to the Goſpel Benefits, which in ſome ſenſe is worſe than down-right Popery, in as much as Popery makes our works meritorious of life, in that Chriſt hath put an infinite value on them by his merits, and ſo makes our works ſo valuable, as to compenſate the Juſtice of God for our ſins, and ſo ſtill maintain the honour of God's Righteouſneſs in forgiving ſin on a valuable conſideration of our works made, by Chriſt, meritorious of it: Whereas the middle way found out by ſome, makes God ſo gracious as by virtue of Chriſt's Mediation God accepts of imperfect defective goſpel Holineſs as perfect, for Chriſt's ſake, and thereupon Forgives: How near this comes to Mr. W's. ſtating the goſpel Ordination, may be eaſily be judged. Mr. Veale leaves Mr. Williams to ſtand by himſelf as to Goſpel Holineſs, giving an Intereſt in the Bleſſings, and ſaith 'tis only an evidence of Faith, and gives no Title, in fol. 421. Hope of Life (ſaith he) may be helped on by Obedience and good Works, becauſe they are an Evidence of his Faith, and ſo of his Intereſt in Chriſt; but there is a vaſt difference between a man's taking comfort in his Obedience, as the evidence of his Title to glory, and Trusting in it, as that which gives him Title.

I come next to Mr. Doelittle, fol. 195. of Morning Lecture, who gives an account of the Proteſtants and Papiſts Doctrine of Juſtification: Firſt, he ſums up the Apoſtles Doctrine of Juſtification, not to him that works, as D • vid deſcribes the bleſſedneſs of the Man to whom the Lord imputes Righteouſneſs, not imputing their Treſpaſſes to them; for he made him to be ſin for us, that we might be the Righteouſneſs of God: Then he quotes the Proteſtant Doctrine thus, We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt by Faith, and not for our Works.

Thoſe whom God effectually calls he freely justifies, not by infuſing Righteouſneſs into them [mark that againſt the Goſpel Ordination of God's regarding our Holineſs] but by pardoning their Sins, and by accounting and accepting their Perſons as righteous, not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Chriſt's ſake alone, imputing the Obedience and Satisfaction of Chriſt to them, they receiving and reſting on him and his Righteouſneſs by Faith. I think nothing can be more oppoſite than this Account of Proteſtant Faith (where is not a word of our Holineſs to Juſtification) and Mr. Williams's, which is made up of Goſpel Obedience, Goſpel Rule, Goſpel Ordination of ſincere Holineſs, regarded by God in our Juſtification. This Proteſtant Doctrine he confirms by referring to a cloud of Witneſſes againſt our new Divinity, viz. The Helvetian Confeſſion, the Bohemian, Gallican, Augustane, Belgick, Wittemberg, and Baſil. Then follows the Popiſh Trent Juſtification: Juſtification is not only forgiveneſs of ſin, but alſo Sanctification of the ſinner, whereby a Man of unjuſt is made juſt; (and Mr. Williams like this complying with goſpel Rule, gives right to goſpel Bleſſing,) The Papists, go on and ſay, the only formal Cauſe of Juſtification is the Righteouſneſs of God, not wherewith be himſelf is righteou • , but whereby he makes us righteous. I know Mr. Williams in words denies our Sanctification to be a part of our Juſtification, but in the whole ſcope of his Argument, he makes our goſpel Holineſs to be lookt upon by God as having a concurrence in our Juſtification; and this is his goſpel Ordination, and in full conformity to the Popiſh Juſtification by God's Righteouſneſs, whereby we are renewed: His laſt clauſe of the Popiſh Article about Juſtification ſuits extremely with Mr. Williams's fling at Doctor Criſp, as dethroning Chriſt for making Chriſt the alone cauſe of our Salvation, without any thing of our works concurring: And thus ſaith the Council of Trent, If any one ſhall ſay, that a Man is justified by the ſ • le imputation of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, or in the ſole remiſſion of ſin, excluding grace and charity, which is ſhed abroad in their hearts, by the holy Spirit, and is inherent in him, or that the grace whereby we are justified is only the ſavour of God; let him be accurſed. This I take to be aſſerted by the Papiſts, in oppoſition to the Proteſtant Doctrine; ſo that the Proteſtant Doctrine was what they accurſt, and what Mr. Williams in effect accurſeth, ſaying the holding it is dethroning Chriſt: VVell then, the Papiſts curſe thoſe that ſay, a man is juſtified by the ſole imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, without any grace or charity. VVhat's become then of Mr. Williams's goſpel Holineſs, ſincere Obedience, that God looks at in the goſpel Rule, to obtain the goſpel Promiſe; again, they curſe thoſe that ſay, our Juſtification is by the alone ſavour of God (or freely by his grace, Rom. 3.25.) VVhat doth Mr. Williams leſs, in falling foul on Doctor Criſp, and all that wholly exclude every thing of man in the buſineſs of Juſtification, and ſay, they enerv • te Chriſt's government, and open a door to all Licentiouſneſs? Whereas the contrary is moſt true, that the grace of God appearing, teaches to deny all ungodlineſs. My next Oppoſer of Mr. W's Goſpel Ordination, is a great maul to Arminianiſm; that is, the Learned, Pious Mr. Perkins, who ſaith in fol. 576 of Vol. 1. Thus the Papists ſay, Chriſt merited that our good Works merit: And anſwers, This is a dotage of their deviſing, for Chriſt merited pardon for ſin impuation of his Righteouſneſs, and Life eternal. And fol. 104. To ſay Chriſt merited that our works merit this takes away Chriſt's Interceſſion, & I may add to ſay, our Holineſs comes in toward our Juſtification doth the ſame. Mr. Perkins comes cloſer in Vol. 2 fol. 205. It may be objected (ſaith he) there is a co-operation of works and faith: I anſwer, That this co-operation is not in the Act of Juſtification, nor in the Work of our Salvation, but in the manifeſtation of the truth and ſincerity of our Faith, and for the declaration of this, Faith and Works jointly concur. Here then is a pestilent and damnable Doctrine of the Papiſts, when they teach Justification by the Wo • ks of the Law. And what is it to teach Juſtification by the Works of the Goſpel, which never had a Promiſe of Juſtification to it, whereas the Works of the Law once had before Adam's Fall. In Fol. 236. He turns perfect Antimonian, with our Homiliſts, if ſome men may cenſure him, and ſaith thus, The Goſpel promiſes Life to him that doth nothing in the cauſe of his Salvation, but only Believes in Chriſt. This is dangerous Doctrine in Doctor Criſp, becauſe it ſpoils Mr. W's Goſpel Ordination of Works and Faith going together in Juſtification, but hath for this 100 years been good ſound Doctrine in Perkins, and the Homilies too. He proceeds in fol. 237. and ſaith thus, Believing and doing are oppoſed in the Article of our Juſtification. —In our good Converſation, they agree, Faith goes before, and doing follows; but in the Work of Juſtification, they are as Fire and Water. This is a fatal ſtroke to the new Goſpel Ordination, and a full concurrence with Dr. Criſp, though Mr. Williams call this a dethroning Chriſt.

Mr. Perkins could not expect to be taken for an Oracle, ſo that by his ipſe Dixit, that every one ſhould receive his Poſitions, tho' he grounded them on plain Scripture, therefore he ſtrengthens his Aſſertion by the ſayings of the Fathers, with which I farther oppoſe Mr. W's. Goſpel Ordination, and confirm Dr. C. in fol. 537. Mr. Perkins ſaith, The Fathers do hold Faith only to be requiſite to Justification, even without the Works of Grace. Chryſoſtom ſaith, in Hom. 7. in Cap. 3. Rom. What is the Law of Faith? (ſaith he) To be ſaved by Grace; here he ſheweth the Power of God, in that he not only ſaved us, and that without uſe of any works, exacting only Faith of us. And Theodoret on Eph. 2. We have not believed of our own accord, but came being called, and when we are come, he doth not exact Purity, and Innocency of Life, but hath Pardoned our ſins, accepting of Faith only. And Baſil Ser. de hum. This it is to glory in the Lord, when a man is not puffed up with his own righteouſneſs, but acknowledgeth himſelf deſtitute of all true righteouſneſs, and Juſtified by Faith alone in Jeſus Chriſt. They are justifyed before God, ſaith Ambroſe, on Rom. 4. Without any labour, or Toyl, by only Faith, no Works of Penitence being hereto required, but only that they believe. This Cloud of Witneſſes, is enough to cover and wholly extinguiſh the Goſpel Ordination of Mr. Williams, without any Comment on them.

Mr. Williams next Aſſertion is a Chip of the ſame block, thus; His (Chriſts) Righteouſneſs imputed, is the cauſe for which we are Juſtified when we do anſwer the Goſpel Rule. Here's no mincing the matter, of bringing in our Sanctification into our Juſtification, for Mr. Williams tells us plainly what our anſwering the Goſpel Rule is, viz. Some degrees of Obedience, Repentance, Love, imperfect Faith, Perſevering, &c. Thus while in words he pretends to ſeparate Sanctification from Juſtification, yet here he really joyns them and confounds them, making our juſtification to be by Chriſts Righteouſneſs imputed when we are holy; when we be ſanctifyed, inferring that it is not till then, and not only ſo, but that that is the Condition of our juſtification: Is this the Apoſtles juſtifying the Ungodly, to be juſtified when we anſwer Mr. Williams Goſpel Rule? Whereas the Goſpel makes no ſuch Rule as he lays down of our ſincere Obedience, concurring to juſtification, or God's having regard to our Goſpel Holineſs, which is Mr. Williams own word: I will not ſtand to refell this, but do aver nothing can be clearer to me than this, that by this expreſſion we are juſtified when we anſwer that Goſpel Rule which Mr. Williams laid down, there is a downright mingling our Sanctification with our juſtification, which the Apoſtle ſtrenuouſly denies; 'Tis not of Works, only of Faith, that it might be by grace, not Gods grace in us, working holineſs, but his grace to us in Chriſt.

The next is that which is the ground work of all Mr▪ W •• building 〈…〉 that glorious Text which I ſo often have harped upon, and which I muſt again ſay ſomewhat to now in its courſe, for that I am not able to bear that ſuch an outwork ſhould treacherouſly be delivered up, and ſay that this Text in Phil. 3.9. Is allowed by all ſound Proteſtants, to be meant, as 'tis ſaid that the Righteouſneſs of God that the Apoſtle deſired to be found in by Faith is only the imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and not at all concerns our Goſpel Holineſs; nay, this Goſpel Holineſs, thus put in the room of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, is a term Foreign to Scripture Language, and is brought in to joſtle out Goſpel Grace. 'Tis Holineſs we are to walk in, but 'tis Grace we are to be ſaved by, which grace is this, that the Rig ••••• neſs of Chriſt is made ours; wrought out by Chriſt for us, and imput ••• 〈…〉 to us without any thing of that which men call our Goſpel Holin ••• 〈…〉 to do therein: Now if the Church of God will be content to loſe 〈…〉 • f Phil. 3.9. and ſuffer a Diſputer to make this breach in our Bank ag ••• 〈◊〉 Popiſh Sea of Juſtification by Goſpel Holineſs, all the reſt of our Banks and • arriers will ſoon be run down; Then they that hunger and thirſt after Righteouſneſs, ſhall be filled; muſt be interpreted of our Goſpel Holineſs. If we be hungry for holineſs in conformity to Goſpel Rule, our Souls ſhall be filled with eternal happineſs, and then if we take to us the Breſt Plate of Righteouſneſs, that is, a holy walking with God, that will defend us from all Temptations of the Devil; as for Faith in Chriſt, that muſt come after our own Righteouſneſs by this Doctrine, whereas the Apoſtle in that place Eph. 6. Brings in that Breaſt Plate as our chief, firſt piece of Armour after Truth, when the Soul is enlightned with the knowledge of God's love, to give Jeſus Chriſt for us. The firſt thing he doth, is, he puts on Chriſt's Righteouſneſs as his Breaſt-Plate: Alas if the Soul puts on his own Righteouſneſs, the Devil's Darts would ſoon pierce through it, but every ſenſible Soul will ſay, with Job, Though I were righteous, yet would I not anſwer, I would make Supplication to my Judg. I ſuppoſe Job had as much to ſay for his cloſe holy walking with God as any that now call for Goſpel Holineſs, to make us partakers of Chriſt's purchaſe, yet he renounces all, and ſaith farther, for the confounding our new Grotian Divinity, If I waſh my ſelf with Snow Water; (of the beſt Goſpel Holineſs that ever meer Man had) and make my hands never ſo clean (with cloſe walking with God) yet ſhalt thou plunge me in the Ditch. (of ſelf Condemnation and eternal miſery) and mine own Cloaths (of ſelf righteouſneſs) ſhall abhor me. O what clear goſpel grace had this good man acquaintance with, when he flies from all the traſh of his being clean, to make way for his juſtification, and betakes himſelf to his Days-Man, his Redeemer, who though he had not actually taken fleſh, yet was then living, and living as his Redeemer, For I know that my Redeemer liveth, though he ſlay me, I will truſt in him: If I juſtifie my ſelf (with my cloſe walking or Goſpel Holineſs, in part or in the whole) mine own mouth would condemn me, nay, though I were perfect yet would I not know my Soul. Here was a right goſpel Spirit, like the Apoſtle Paul, concerning the Law blameleſs, yet, my Righteouſneſs is Dung; ſo Job, If I be righteous, I will not lift up mine head, Job. 10.15. I will not glory in my Breaſt-Plate of mine own Righteouſneſs.

Again, if with Mr. Williams the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt by Faith be our own goſpel Holineſs, why may not Eſa. 45.24. In him have I Righteouſneſs and ſtrength, he our goſpel Holineſs too, and Jer. 23.6. Jehovah our Righteouſneſs be the ſame, and then, Have not ſubmitted to the Righteouſneſs of God, Rom. 10.3. ſhall have the ſame uſage, and mainly intend our Goſpel Holineſs, though the Apoſtle brings it in, in oppoſition to our own righteouſneſs: But bleſſed be God, if Mr. W. or an Angel ſhould undermine theſe Foundations of a ſinner's ſalvation, yet on this Rock God will build his Church, that Chriſt was made ſin for us, that we might be made the Righteouſneſs of God in him. I ſay in him, not in our goſpel holineſs, and if on this foundation any man builds hay and ſtubble, (as our goſpel holineſs compared with Chriſts Righteouſneſs) his work ſhall be burnt and he ſhall ſuffer loſs, but he himſelf ſhall be ſaved ſo as by fire, it being a dangerous thing to mingle our goſpel holineſs with Chriſts Righteouſneſs. Again, if Chriſt Righteouſneſs, Phil. 3.9. be our goſpel Holineſs, Mr. W. may as well ſay, by the Righteouſneſs of one the free gift came upon all Men, to juſtification of life, Rom. 5.18. doth principally intend, not ſo much the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed to us as the goſpel holineſs of every one of us.

If we give this Inch, he may take an Ell, but we are bid earneſtly to contend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints, of which this is as great a part as any I know next the Deity of our Lord Jeſus; therefore we muſt not part with it to let in a ſham Model of Schematical Divinity of God's regarding our holineſs as a ground to juſtify us, we complying with the Goſpel Rule of ſincere Obedience to qualify us for Chriſts Righteouſneſs to be Imputed to us.

By this unſavory gloſs of Mr. W. any Judicious Perſon may ſee how unmeet he is to Arraign, and by his Arguments, to come in Evidence againſt the Doctrine delivered by Dr. C. If he would have convinced him, he muſt do it with ſtronger and better Reaſons than Human, even with oppoſite Scriptures, if his Bible have any ſuch as are repugnant to the plain force of expreſs Scriptures, that the Dr. inſiſted on, ſuch as the Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, to prove ſin really tranſlated on Chriſt, and the Children being yet unborn, having done neither Good nor Evil, he ſaid, Jacob have I loved, and Eſau have I hated, to prove that God loves us, and imputes the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt to his Elect, without reſpect of good or Evil done by them: But he having no Scriptures to overthrow thoſe Maxims, he may not think to do it with plauſible Sophiſtry of the ſuitableneſs of it to God's holineſs, to juſtifie none but the Holy, when the Scripture ſaith expreſly, he Juſtifies the Ungodly, and ſo I beſeech the Lord to do to him as well as to my ſelf, elſe woe unto us.

Next comes the exact Copy of Paul a Phariſee, thus; The grace of God is hereby stated as free as is conſistent with his Government, or rather, I may ſay, as free as is conſiſtent with Juſtification, partly by Works, and partly by grace; I wonder that any man ſhould ſay, none need the riches of grace more than I, as he doth in the next words, and yet tell the World a little before that Gods Government, and Rectoral diſtribution of rewards and puniſhments, require our complying with Goſpel Rule in ſome degrees of Obedience, and the Goſpel Sanction fixeth ſincere holineſs and perſeverance in Faith, as the terms of poſſeſſing Heaven, and ſo by bringing in our Goſpel Holineſs into our juſtification, totally make void the grace of God, and then in effect this is all the grace that I need; that when I have perſevered in the Goſpel Rule, I may tell God now I have done what thou requireſt; now Heaven is due to me, for Chriſt hath purchaſed this Goſpel Ordination. O that God would un-horſe lofty Spirits, and make us cry out, (with the poor Publican, ſmiting on our Breaſts,) Lord be merciful to me a ſinner, not Lord be merciful to me a complyer in Goſpel Holineſs; if I could hear him ſay ſo, it would be with me an Argument that he thought he needed the Riches of grace, but the Righteous need not grace, for he came not to call the Righteous, but ſinners. Is this the only grace you will allow God to glory in, that when men have lived ſincerely holy all their days, then they may come to God and ſay, I demand my Penny I have laboured for; I crave Heaven, for Chriſt dyed for this end that I ſhould ſave my ſelf by my Evangelical righteouſneſs, and this is conſiſtent with thy Rectoral diſtribution of Rewards and Puniſhments, viz. rewards to the holy, and puniſhments to the unholy; as for Chriſts Righteouſneſs and my juſtification, by that, I muſt name it for faſhion ſake, but my darling Holineſs with perſeverance, are the terms of poſſeſſing Heaven? To which our Lord Jeſus hath already anſwered, and ſo will to every Self-Juſtitiary, as in Matth. 21.31. Verily I ſay unto you, that the Publicans and the Harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you. When the holy Phariſee comes with his, God I thank thee I am not as other Men; I am none of thoſe ſinners that truſt to be ſaved, by the meer grace of God, in the merits of Chriſt: I am none of St. Pauls Antinomians, who ſaid, thoſe that are of the Law are accurſed: I faſt twice a week, I give Alms, I have ſincere Obedience, I have Goſpel holineſs, I hope I ſhall ſcape well. Then the poor Publican, the poor ſelf-condemned ſinner cries, Grace, grace, unclean, unclean, I am a chief ſinner; I fly for refuge to the Hope ſet before me, the blood of Chriſt only, to free me from my ſins; ſure this Man will go down juſtified rather than the other, and ſuch a ſort of juſtification I beg of God for my Soul, and that Mr. W. that ſaith he needs the riches of grace, and the more becauſe he brings in goſpel holineſs to concur with Chriſts Righteouſneſs in Juſtification: I hope and pray he may ſeek the Publicans, and not the Phariſees juſtification, and leave Gods rectoral diſtribution to his own holy determinations in his Word, Come ye bleſſed, and go ye curſed, as they were choſen before the foundation of the World, or paſt by in Gods eternal Decree, yet ſtill the choſen were choſe to Faith and holineſs, tho' not as thoſe Terms which give a right to Heaven.

Mr. W. goes on thus, Reader note that in this • ook I ſpeak of the Adult, and not Infants, and why Infants ſaved one way and Adult another; if Infants be ſanctifyed in the Womb, by infuſing the new Nature, what is that but the ſeed of Faith, and all grace in Chriſt? and if ſo, he not they ſaved as the Adult, though their grace ſhine not out; muſt Infants be ſaved by the merits of Chriſt alone, but not ſo the Adult, who muſt have Goſpel holineſs to Joyn with Chriſts righteouſneſs, for God to have ſome regard to in their Salvation? If this be his meaning then the Garments of Infants muſt be all of pure fine white Linnen, and of thoſe grown to 15 or 20, it muſt be Linſey Wolſey, the warp of Linnen, and Woof of the Wollen of goſpel holineſs, and ſo Infants may be buried in Linnen and the others in Flannel; this is the rectoral diſtribution of threats and promiſes, not according to Gods way, he that believeth ſhall be ſaved, and he that believeth not is condemned: But the Adult that is ſincerely holy, God is ſo juſt as to ſave him, and he that thinks to be ſaved only by Faith in the Lord Jeſus, bringing forth fruits of Holineſs, is an Antinomian, dethrones Chriſt, enervates his Laws, he muſt be expoſed to ſcorn.

Mr. W. proceeds, Thou must expect to take up my fall ſenſe by a view of ſeveral Chapters, and not only one, becauſe ſundry Chapters refer to the ſame points, more or leſs: We uſe to ſay that which is ſawce for a Gooſe is ſawce for a Gander, but 'tis too common for men to look through red angry Spectacles on the Authors they oppoſe, but would have their own writings lookt on in green ones; would it not have been becoming Mr. W. to have dealt with the Dr. as he thou's his Reader to do by him, to take up his full ſenſe, by a view of ſeveral chapters, then he would not have charged the Dr. with enervating Chriſts Laws, by pleading the free juſtification of ſinners without works: if he had compared his Sermons on Eſa. 53. with thoſe on Titus, of denying ungodlineſs: Is not our Lords Rule good here? What you would that Men ſhould do to you, do ye the ſame to them. If Mr. W. would have People compare one part of his Book with the other, 'tis equal he ſhould have done ſo by the Dr. which would have taken off a great part of his Acrimony in making the Dr. a Dethroner of Chriſt.

His next look's invidious, and is a clear contradiction to his laſt deſire of comparing one part with another, for he puts a ſenſe by force on the Doctor thus, and forget not (ſaith Mr. Williams) that though the Dr. oft in his Book ſpeaks of Men as Believers, yet every thing is true of the Elect, viz. They have as much Title to ſaving Bleſſings, only they do not know it; this was his Judgment. Here by head and ſhoulders he brings in this as the Drs. judgment of the Elect, without one Tittle of Proof; forget not this, that whatever the Doctor ſaith of ſaving Bleſſings that Believers have a title to, he means it of the Elect; this 〈…〉

Well, but what if that be forc'd on the Dr. as his judgment, that all ſaving Bleſſings belong to the Elect tho' before believing they do not know it? How much more is this than what Mr. Williams grants in fol. 39. in ſaying Chriſt merited for all the Elect, that they ſhould certainly partake of the ſaving benefits of his Righteouſneſs? Where is the Drs. enervating Chriſts Laws, if this was his judgment? Doth not this Correſpond with that of the Apoſtle, Eph. 1. He raiſed us up together, and made us ſit together in heavenly places, in Chriſt Jeſus, do • h not this evince that all the Elect were raiſed up with Chriſt, and do now ſit with him in Heaven, being in his Heart as the twelve Tribes were upon Arons Breaſt-Plate when he went into the Holy of Holies: Are they not in the Heart of Chriſt, and doth he not pray for thoſe that God gave to him? if ſo, then all ſaving Bleſſings belong to them, only the Doctor had not the happineſs to word it to pleaſe Mr. W. therefore is quarrell'd at.

But next, he ſweetens all, and having broken the Doctors Head, gives him a Plaiſter thus, I have carefully avoided any Reflection on Revere • d Dr. Criſp, whom I believe a Holy Man: For which reſpect I return many thanks, and bleſs God for fulfilling his word, that when a mans ways pleaſe the Lord, he makes his Enemies at peace with him: But may I not wonder that thoſe that have uttered ſo great Invectives, that he was for dethroning Chriſt, ſhould yet be convinc'd from the ſtrain of his writings, that he was a Holy Man. This is agreeable to what treatment he met with in the Heat of Peoples flocking by thouſands to hear him, which he was much maligned for, yet there was not a man of all his detractors that ever charged him with the leaſt immorality or indecency, or neglect of exacteſt holineſs, though there was ſcarce ever ſeen a wrinkle in his Brow, he being chearful in Converſation, even to admiration; yet as ſolemnly devout in the Worſhip of God on Lords days, and Faſt days, as the greateſt legaliſt, ſo that his Enemies gave him his due Character for exact holineſs. But now for Mr. W. to ſay, Dr. C. was holy, and Reverend Dr. C. and but a few Lines before to ſay, all the reſt of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Chriſt, &c. ſeems ſtrange, but without doubt it is from a mighty over-ruling Providence of God, not only out of the mouths of Babes and Sucklings, the unlearned to perfect praiſe to his Name, but to ſtill the Enemy and Avenger, Mat. 11. Pſ. 8. Not only do the ſimple, Celebrate the Praiſes of God, for the opening the Rich Mercies of Free-Grace by the Dr. but the Learned that ſeem to be his Enemies, and come out againſt him with Vengeance, God doth ſtill them; nay, after high reproach he engages them to acknowledge this Dethroner of Chriſt, I believe was a holy Man; this is like Bellarming, propter incertitudinem, tutiſſimum eſt, &c. 'Tis abſolute Sovereign grace in Chriſt, nothing in us that ſaves us when all is done.

Before I leave Mr. W. in this good temper, I hope it may be uſeful as well for ſetling the wavering, as confirming the ſound: To quote a paſſage or two I met with occaſionally, out of unqueſtionable Authority for Orthodoxy in the Faith, for a ſuffrage to Dr. Criſp in what he is oppoſed by Mr. W. and that is out of the Reverend Dr. Harris of Hanwell, an eminent member of the famous Aſſembly of Divines Anno 1652. I begin with his aſſerting, That Chriſt ſuſtained the Perſon of a ſinner: This is a grand charge againſt Dr. C. that Chriſt was a reputed ſinner, but this eminent Dr. H. makes no ſcruple to Aſſert it roundly, without any ambiguity, and ſaith directly in his Sermon, called, Abſaloms Funeral, in fol. 215 Christ he ſtood in our room, and ſuſtained the Perſon of a ſinner, though in himſelf ſinleſs, could not he though he was the Heir and first born, eſcape until his Blood was ſhed, and fleſh rent, and Soul poured forth as an Offering? Then make good that thou art in Christ, and (ſo) a new Creature, or elſe take thy leave of all hope and comfort: I add, if this were not true, that Chriſt ſustained the Perſon of a ſinner, how could God puniſh him, or how could the Apoſtle ſay to the ſeven Churches, He loved us, and waſhed us from our ſins, in his Blood; ſure thoſe us were in Christ when he ſhed his Blood, and i • his own Perſon as head, he ſuſtained them and all other ſinners that he ſhed his Blood for, elſe, how were they Crucified with him, and raiſed with him, and made ſit with him in Heavenly places; now becauſe Reaſon and Philoſophy cannot fathom this, ſhall we reject plain Scripture, and ſay, that the Elect have no intereſt in Chriſt, till they believe, though God ſay plainly, grace was given them in Chriſt before the World was, and they were choſen in him before the World.

Dr. H. gives his Teſtimony againſt the new ſort of Divinity, which may look better from him than Dr. Criſp, and may reconcile to his Doctrine, or rather Chriſts, that nothing muſt come in of ours to joyn with Chriſt for Juſtification: and ſaith in fol. 36. from Rom. 8.1. No Condemnation to thoſe in Chriſt, the Doctrines of later Editions (Arminians) drive moſtly at this, to wreſt you from your Eſtate in Christ,—hence the ſuperadding of our Righteouſneſs to Chriſts, ad Corroborandum, look to your ſtanding, find all your Hopes, Joys, Life in him alone, owe to him all Wiſdom, Righteouſneſs, Sanctification, Redemption and Salvation. This is far from the New Scheme of Goſpel Ordination of Chriſts purchaſing that Faith, Holineſs, &c. have their uſe in Goſpel Benefits, from their Conformity to the Rule of the Promiſe, not of the Precept; this taking us off from our ſuperadded Righteouſneſs, ad corroborandum, to ſtrengthen our Title, clearly evinces, that he was not for Faith and holineſs giving a Title; no, Faith can only receive it, and Holineſs Evidence it.

Dr. H. anſwers for Dr. C. as being charged that if God acts us in beleiving and, God beleives, and God repents, and ſaith in fol. 64. Not only the power but the Act too is from God, Phil. 2. He works in us to will and to do, if it be thus (ſay the Jeſuits and others) then Man ſhall not be master of his own Acts, then God ſhall be ſaid to repent and believe, Man ſhall do nothing, but all ſhall be reſolved unto God. Anſw. May not Man be ſaid to underſtand, though God do powerfully inlighten, ſo alſo to hate, love, &c. They (the Jeſuits) yield that God worketh upon the Ʋnderstanding, and the Affections, and yet man underſtands and affects; and why ſhould not the ſame be true of the Will? Secondly, God firſt works all things in us, and then by us; he prevents and acts us, and then we work under God. Object. This takes off all endeavour; nay, this quickens our Care and endeavour, if St. Paul may be heard, Phil 2.13. Therefore we muſt work out all, becauſe we depend on God for all, ſaith, the Apoſtle, neither doth God only work in his People a power of willing, but the very Act alſo, and indeed the acting of the will of man is more than giving him a power only to will.

The Covenant of grace is this, be content to accept of anothers Obedience, and to lay hold of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt for Justification, (he ſoars as high as Dr. C.) and ſaith, there is nothing required of us more than this, to diſclaim our ſelves, and to make Christ alone our Teacher, our head, and all-ſufficient Saviour, (nay in fol. 35. he is clear and ſaith) What can we do toward the getting of a new Heart? Anſw. Man cannot concur to the renewing of himſelf as a Cauſe or an Agent.

If this be good Divinity in Dr. H. and the Aſſembly of Divines, why ſhould it be quarrel'd at in Dr. C. Would it not be more becoming the greatneſs of Mr. W's Spirit, to have encountred the Aſſembly in theſe particulars, than Dr. C. yea doubtleſs: But there was a new Scheme to be erected, and this would more eaſily obtain againſt a ſingle Perſon, than the eſtabliſhed Religion of the Nation, which in the chiefeſt points objected againſt Dr. C. concurs with him; yea, after all, when Mr. W. finds by the ſtrong Proofs brought againſt him, that his Scheme will not take, he betakes himſelf to the Subſtance of what he Objects againſt the Dr. as in time may be made evident; in the mean time, I humbly conceive, I have made it appear, that his Preface hath not only wronged the Dr. but the truth which I doubt not but in a great meaſure he ſees.

Thus begging of the Lord, that ſome glory may riſe to his Name by ſome few hours inveſtigating the Truth: I conclude as well for Mr. W. and all that deſire the Truth as it is in Jeſus, may take place, as for my ſelf, let the Words of my Mouth, and the Meditation of my Heart, be acceptable in thy ſight, O Lord, Tzuri ve Goeli, my Rock, and my Redeemer.

Amen. FINIS.